iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiliiliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiilliiliii  I  lliiilliiiiin^ 


L>.»»i«  BSI5S5 

Srclion    *CS\^ 


THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 


AN  INTERPRETATION   OF 
THE   ENGLISH    BIBLE 

By  B.  H.  CARROLL,  D.D. 

The  Book  of  Genesis 

8vo,  cloth,  net  $2.25 

The  Books  of  Exodus  and  Leviticus 

8vo,  cloth,  net  $2.25 

The  Book  of  Daniel 

8vo,  cloth,  net  $1.75 

The  Book  of  Revelation 

Svo,  cloth,  net  $1.75 

The  Pastoral  Epistles 

Svo,  cloth,  net  $1.75 

OTHER  VOLUMES  TO  FOLLOW 

The  President  of  the  Southwestern  Baptist 
Theological  Seminary  presents  in  these  vol- 
umes lectures  delivered  in  his  classroom. 
They  will  be  followed  by  others  on  different 
books  of  the  Bible.  Thousands  who  have 
been  touched  by  his  ministry,  hundreds  of 
students  who  have  been  influenced  by  his 
teaching,  and  many  who  have  been  helped 
by  his  writings  will  appreciate  the  oppor- 
tunity to  secure  his  comments  on  the 
Scripture. 


( 

An  ilttt^rprttattntt  of  \\\t  !Eitgl!0l|  ?Btbb 

Daniel  and  The 
Inter-Biblical  Period 


•''II ' 


v^  BY 

B.  H.  CARROLL,  D.D.,  LL.D. 

Late  President  of    Southwestern  Baptist 
Theological  Seminary 


EDITED  BY 

J.  B.  CRANFILL,  LL.D. 


New  York        Chicago       Toronto 

Fleming  H.  Revell  Company 

London   and   Edinburgh 


Copyright,  191 5,  by 
FLEMING  H.  REVELL  COMPANY 


New  York:  158  Fifth  Avenue 
Chicago:  125  N.  Wabash  Ave. 
Toronto :  25  Richmond  St.  W. 
London :  21  Paternoster  Square 
Edinburgh:    100  Princes  Street 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 


Editor's  Introduction 

I.     Introduction  TO  THE  Book  OF  Daniel i 

II.     The  history  in  the  first  chapter i8 

III.  The  history  of  Nebuchadnezzar 32 

IV.  Daniel  and  Belshazzar 46 

V.     The  history  of  Darius  the  Mede 60 

VI.     The  related  prophetic  sections  of  Daniel 69 

VII.  The  prophetic  sections  of  Daniel  (continued).     83 

VIII.  The  prophetic  sections  of  Daniel  (continued)  .    95 

IX.     The  marvelous  ninth  chapter  of  Daniel 108 

X.  The  marvelous  ninth  chapter  of  Daniel  (con- 
tinued)    119 

XL  The  marvelous  ninth  chapter  of  Daniel  (con- 
tinued)     135 

XII,    The  glorious  vision  of  the  Son  of  God 149 

XIII.  The  final  prophecies  of  the  book 162 

XIV.  Introduction  to  Inter-Biblical  period 173 

XV.    The  Persian  period 186 

XVI.     The  Jews  under  Greek  rule 198 

XVII.    The  Jews  under  Antiochus  III 210 

XVIII.    Antiochus  Epiphanes 220 

XIX.    The  Maccabees 232 

XX.    The  Jews  under  the  Romans  and  Herod 243 


EDITOR'S  INTRODUCTION 

It  is  with  great  joy  that  the  present  volume  is  given 
to  the  public.  This  is  the  sixth  of  the  series.  Hereto- 
fore, Revelation,  Genesis,  Exodus-Leviticus,  Numbers  to 
Ruth,  and  the  Pastoral  Epistles  of  Paul,  in  which  volume 
is  incorporated  the  Epistles  of  Peter,  John  and  Jude, 
have  appeared  in  the  order  named.  The  present  volume 
loses  nothing  in  comparison  with  its  predecessors.  In 
some  respects  it  will  hold  a  deeper  interest  for  the 
student  of  the  Bible  than  any  of  the  volumes  thus  far 
presented.  The  average  Christian  is  greatly  confused 
when  he  comes  to  study  the  book  of  Daniel.  Not  many 
are  equipped  with  a  technical  knowledge  of  ancient  his- 
ory,  and  those  who  are  so  blessed  find  it  difficult  to  co- 
ordinate the  profane  history  of  Daniel's  time  and  sub- 
sequent centuries  with  the  prophecies  of  this  wonderful 
Book.  In  its  study,  one  is  always  reminded  of  the  book 
of  Revelation,  to  which  in  many  ways  it  is  closely  allied. 
Even  then  we  are  often  at  a  loss  to  interpret  its  won- 
derful dreams,  visions,  and  prophecies. 

Dr.  B.  H.  Carroll,  the  author  of  this  volume,  was  at 
home  in  every  branch  of  history,  sacred,  profane,  ancient 
and  modem.  I  question  if  there  was  in  his  day,  or  if 
there  is  now,  a  man  anywhere  who  had  or  has  a  more 
far-reaching  knowledge  of  history.  All  of  this  great 
learning  and  scholarly  equipment  has  been  brought  to 
bear  upon  the  book  of  Daniel  and  its  interpretation.    As 


vi  INTRODUCTION 

in  the  book  of  Revelation,  so  here  he  is  strongly  post- 
millennial,  and  buttresses  his  position  with  copious  quota- 
tions from  this  remarkable  book.  He  quotes  these  words : 
(Daniel  2  :  35)  "The  stone  that  smote  the  image  became  a 
great  mountain  and  filled  the  whole  earth."  And  again 
(Daniel  2:44)  "In  the  days  of  these  kings  shall  the  God 
of  heaven  set  up  a  kingdom,  which  shall  never  be  de- 
stroyed, and  the  kingdom  shall  not  be  left  to  other  peo- 
ple, but  it  shall  break  in  pieces  and  consume  all  these 
kingdoms,  and  it  shall  stand  forever." 

Dr.  Carroll  holds  the  view  that  the  kingdom  of  Jesus 
Christ,  which  was  set  up  during  the  personal  ministry 
of  our  Lord,  is  not  a  kingdom  that  shall  grow  smaller 
and  smaller  as  time  goes  on,  but  shall  expand,  and  in- 
crease, and  grow  larger  and  larger  until,  according  to 
the  prophecies  quoted,  it  shall  fill  the  whole  earth. 

This  volume,  like  those  that  preceded  it,  is  charming 
in  style,  and  of  entrancing  interest  to  the  reader,  but  it 
will  not  yield  its  richest  reward  without  more  than 
reading.    It  needs  to  be  carefully  and  reverently  studied. 

The  seven  chapters  on  the  Inter-Biblical  period  are 
destined  to  be  of  inestimable  value  to  the  lover  of  God's 
Word.  This  period,  commonly  known  among  us  as  "the 
dark  ages,"  is  rich  in  interest  for  the  student  of  the 
Bible.  When  the  canon  of  Scripture  closed  the  sacred 
history  ceased  to  shed  light  upon  contemporaneous  events, 
but  the  learned  author  of  this  volume  brings  to  us  a 
flood  of  light,  which  sheds  its  efifulgence  upon  this  ob- 
scure period  of  the  history  of  God's  people. 

It  may  be  said  in  passing  that  it  also  abounds  in  rich 
references  to  current  profane  history.  But  Dr.  Carroll, 
although  as  he  confesses  in  the  volume,  he  was  tempted 
to  step  aside  and  revel  in  the  history  of  ancient  Greece, 
Rome  and  contemporaneous  nations,  treats  specially  only 


INTRODUCTION  vii 

that  profane  history  which  bore  upon  the  history  of 
the  Jews. 

But  I  will  not  detain  the  reader  longer.  The  book 
itself  is  before  us  for  our  reading,  our  study,  our  inspira- 
tion and  our  encouragement.  It  will  bless  every  student 
of  the  Bible  who  takes  the  time  and  pains  to  peruse  it 
and  to  study  it.  And,  as  I  believe,  will  continue  to  be  a 
blessing  to  God's  people  until  Jesus  comes. 

J.  B.  CRANFILL. 
Dallas,  Texas. 


INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL. 

Scripture:  All  references. 

THIS  first  chapter  on  Daniel   commences  with  a 
quadruple  heading: 
"Daniel  in  the  Lions'  Den." — Bible. 

"Daniel  in  the  Heathens'  Den." — Anonymous. 

"Daniel  in  the  Critics'  Den." — Sir  Robert  Anderson. 

"Daniel  in  the  Crickets'  Den." — Somebody. 

This  quadruple  heading  is  both  logical  and  chrono- 
logical. It  is  a  felicitous  anti-climax  and  it  suggests  that 
Daniel's  enemies  are  fading  out — "growing  small  by  de- 
grees and  beautifully  less." 

The  lions  were  truly  formidable  wild  beasts  in  their 
own  skins.  The  Heathen  are  only  spiritual  wild  beasts 
in  figurative  skins.  The  Critics  are  German  rationalists 
in  spliced  heathen  and  Christian  skins.  The  Crickets  are 
English  assimilators  in  German  skins. 

In  the  jungle,  when  the  lion  roars,  all  animate  nature 
becomes  silent.  When  the  lion  is  gone  hyenas  howl  and 
jackals  bark.  When  hyenas  and  jackals  pass  on  the 
crickets  begin  to  chirp. 

Since  Daniel,  on  earth,  trembled  not  at  the  roar, 
Howl,  bark,  and  chirp,  he  may  well  ignore. 

I  say  that  these  four  headings  are  both  logical  and 
chronological.  The  lions  of  Darius  belong  to  b.c.  521. 
The  first  attack  on  the  historical  veracity  of  the  book,  on 

1 


ft  INTRODUCTION 

the  reality  of  its  miracles  and  prophecy,  quite  naturally 
came  from  a  heathen,  Porphyry,  in  the  third  century  a.d. 
In  a  fifteen  volume  assault  on  Christianity  in  general,  he 
devotes  the  twelfth  volume  to  an  attack  on  Daniel,  origi- 
nating the  substance  of  all  subsequent  hostile  criticism. 
Centuries  later  he  was  somewhat  timidly  followed  by  the 
apostate  Dutch  Jew,  Spinoza,  and  still  later  by  the  Eng- 
lish infidel,  Hobbes,  and  the  deist,  Collins. 

So  far,  all  these  attacks  on  the  book  came  from  with- 
out, and  so  coming  were  easily  repulsed.  But,  in  the 
nineteenth  century  a.d.  the  German  radical  critics  arose. 
The  retention  of  the  union  of  Church  and  State  by  Prot- 
estantism, notably  in  Germany  and  England,  let  the  world 
into  the  church,  bringing  about,  among  many  others,  two 
monstrous  and  incalculable  evils :  First,  spiritual  regen- 
eration was  no  longer  essential  to  church  membership. 
Second,  church  dignitaries  were  appointed  by  the  politi- 
cal power.  In  this  way  the  pulpits  of  churches  and  the 
professorships  in  so-called  Christian  schools  were  filled 
not  only  with  unregenerate  men,  but  with  atheists  and 
materialists.  Later,  when  the  old  time  heathen  philoso- 
phy of  Epicurus,  Lucretius  and  Democritus  was  revived 
in  the  modern  hypothesis  of  Evolution,  and  its  principles 
applied  to  Biblical  criticism,  the  radicals  became  more 
extreme  and  destructive.  This  speculative  philosophy  had 
been  smitten  hip  and  thigh  by  Paul  at  Athens,  the  home 
of  its  origin.  But  now,  under  the  two  evils  before  cited, 
it  comes  not  from  without,  in  the  open,  and  under  an 
honest  flag,  but  from  within  and  in  the  name  of  Christi- 
anity. In  heart  and  in  belief  they  are  at  one  with  Epi- 
curus, Lucretius,  Democritus,  Porphyry,  Spinoza,  Hobbes, 
Collins.  Bolingbroke,  Tom  Paine  and  Voltaire.  Indeed,  it 
is  hardly  fair  to  the  deists  to  be  ranked  with  atheistical 
materialists.     Tom  Paine  was  far  and  away  above  many 


THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL  8 

who  now  occupy  pulpits  and  professors'  chairs  in  so-called 
Christian  schools.  In  the  nineteenth  century  these  Ger- 
man radical  critics  attacked  the  book  of  Daniel.  Then 
the  English  assimilators,  not  imitators,  of  the  Germans, 
came  to  the  front. 

Bibliography 

In  citing  authors  on  Daniel,  I  need  not  mention  Por- 
phyry, the  heathen,  nor  the  apostate  Dutch  Jew,  Spinoza, 
nor  the  infidel,  Hobbes,  nor  the  deist,  Collins,  since  in 
the  main  these  original  fountains  become  the  streams  of 
the  German  rationalists  of  the  nineteenth  century.  Then  I 
need  not  cite  the  German  rationalists  for  several  reasons : 
Each  later  critic  of  them  knocks  out  or  modifies  the  the- 
ory of  his  predecessors,  however  much  he  may  fail  in 
exploiting  his  own.  Moreover,  what  one  has  facetiously 
said  of  the  German  language  in  general  may  be  more 
soberly  applied  to  the  radical  Biblical  criticism  of  that 
language,  namely, 

"It  has  seven  deadly  sins: 


"I 

"3 
"4 

"5 
"6 

"7 


Too  many  books  in  the  language. 
Too  many  volumes  in  a  book. 
Too  many  chapters  in  a  volume. 
Too  many  sentences  in  a  chapter. 
Too  many  words  in  a  sentence. 
Too  many  letters  in  a  word. 
Too  much  stroke  in  a  letter." 


Taken  in  mass  it  is  as  the  chaos  of  Genesis,  "without 
form  and  void  and  darkness  is  on  the  face  of  the  deep."  Or, 
like  the  chaos  of  Ovid  described  in  his  Metamorphoses, 
If  the  reader  should  count  it  worth  while  to  explore  fog 
banks,  jungles  and  dismal  swamps,  let  him  go  in  and  lose 
himself;  there  will  be  none  to  hinder.     But  to  complete 


4  INTRODUCTION 

our  survey  in  any  thorough  way  we  would  need  the  lon- 
gevity of  Methuselah  and  the  patience  of  Job.  So  far 
as  the  book  of  Daniel  is  concerned  we  do  not  need  to  study 
any  one  of  these  German  radical  critics,  because  we  may 
find  in  two  accessible  English  books  the  assimilated  sub- 
stance of  the  German  rationalists :  Farrar  on  Daniel  in 
the  Expositor's  Bible,  and  Driver  on  Daniel  in  the  Cam- 
bridge Bible.  The  "silly  blunders,"  the  "cocksuredness," 
the  "hysteria,"  the  "contradictions,"  the  "inveterate  in- 
accuracies" and  "the  alternate  kisses  and  kicks"  of  Farrar 
will  satisfy  the  most  morbid  appetite.  Driver  is  calmer, 
clearer  and  much  more  cautious  in  spirit,  while  equally 
void  of  the  judicial  mind  and  equally  indefensible  in  his 
conclusions.  In  Farrar  and  Driver,  I  say  we  have  the 
assimilated  substance  of  all  hostile  criticism  on  the  book 
of  Daniel. 

In  "Knickerbocker"  Washington  Irving  explains  how 
the  Dutch  burghers  of  old  New  York  kept  their  rusty 
weather-vanes  pointing  right  once  a  day.  Every  morn- 
ing the  governor  would  send  a  little  negro  to  his  roof  to 
force  his  vane  in  line  with  the  wind  and  the  burghers 
would  then  set  theirs  with  the  governor's.  So  about  once 
a  year  some  German  resets  the  vane  of  radical  criticism ; 
the  next  year  the  dependent  Englishman  resets  his  by  the 
German's,  The  fact  is  humiliating  and  provokes  com- 
passion. 

The  presuppositions  of  this  radical  criticism  vitiate  all 
its  conclusions,  but  they  are  amusing!  I  cite  some  of 
them: 

I.  There  is  no  real  miracle  or  prophecy.  If  any 
prophecy  be  verified  by  fulfillment  then  it  must  be  dated 
after  fulfillment  and  counted  history  cast  in  the  form  of 
prophecy,  or  else  accounted  a  shrewd  guess  based  on  a 
careful  study  of  probabilities.     Any  explanation  is  prefer- 


THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL  5 

able  to  the  supernatural.     What  cannot  be  accounted  for 
on  natural  grounds  must  be  rejected. 

2.  All  statements  by  Bible  authors  must  be  corrected 
by  seemingly  contrary  statements  of  heathen  authors. 
Any  judgment  that  finds  confirmation  of  the  Bible  in 
heathen  testimony  must  be  classed  as  unscholarly  and 
unscientific. 

3.  Any  uninspired  version  must  be  allowed  by  its  vari- 
ations to  discredit  the  original. 

4.  Jewish  punctuation  of  a  Messianic  passage  of  the 
Hebrew  text,  though  adopted  centuries  after  Christ  and 
apparently  with  a  view  to  defeat  the  reference  to  Jesus 
of  Nazareth,  must  be  accepted  though  it  make  nonsense 
of  the  passage.  (See  punctuation  of  Daniel  9:25  fol- 
lowed by  Canterbury  Revisers  but  corrected  by  Amer- 
ican Revisers.  Of  course  Leeser's  Modern  Jewish  ver- 
sion accords  with  the  Canterbury  punctuation.  The  non- 
sense made  of  the  passage  by  this  false  punctuation  will 
be  shown  in  the  discussion  on  that  chapter.) 

5.  The  interpretations  of  O.  T.  Messianic  passages  by 
Jews  living  subsequent  to  N.  T.  times  must  be  preferred 
to  B.  C.  Jewish  interpretations,  or  the  interpretations  of 
Christ  himself  and  His  apostles.  The  semi-radical  critic 
explains  away  our  Lord's  interpretation  by  either  attrib- 
uting ignorance  to  Him  because  He  had  "emptied  himself" 
of  knowledge,  or  that  He  merely  used  terms  of  popular 
belief  without  endorsing  them. 

6.  The  only  criticism  worth  while  is  that  of  "the 
merest  handful  of  scholars,"  and  these  must  be  of  the 
type  of  Cheyne,  Driver,  Farrar,  et  al.  They  safely  damn 
all  else  by  simply  applying  epithets:  "unscholarly,"  "un- 
scientific," which  disposition  of  adversaries  is  neat  and 
cheap. 

I  do  not  say  that  these  presuppositions  would  be  ex- 


6  INTRODUCTION 

pressed  in  exactly  these  terms  by  the  radical  critics  them- 
selves, but  I  do  affirm  that  they  are  fairly  deducible  from 
their  writings ;  that  their  spirit  is  irreverent  and  self- 
centered  ;  that  the  souls  of  their  readers  are  not  stirred  to 
penitence,  to  faith  and  sanctification  or  to  revival.  They 
may  be  intellectual,  but  they  are  not  spiritual. 

How  mightily,  nearly  all  the  old  English  Commentaries 
stirred  the  spiritual  man !  These  radical  criticisms  may 
be  to  natural  sight  as  brilliant  as  the  aurora  borealis,  but 
they  melt  no  arctic  ice  in  sinners'  hearts.  Their  light  is 
the  "fox-fire"  of  decaying  wood,  without  heat  and  little 
visible  even  in  the  dark.  Yet  at  night,  before  the  moon 
rises  a  few  lightning  bugs  sticking  their  tails  together  on 
a  mullein  leaf  may  imagine  they  are  illuminating  the 
world. 

Sir  Robert  Anderson  substantially  makes  this  telling 
point,  citing  the  words  of  an  eminent  jurist:  "An  expert 
witness  must  be  confined  to  the  witness  box  and  to  the 
one  line  of  facts  upon  which  his  testimony  is  competent. 
His  place  is  never  on  the  bench  nor  on  the  jury.  He  has 
not  the  judicial  mind."  The  very  fact  that  he  is  an 
expert  makes  him  too  narrow  to  be  able  to  fairly  weigh 
the  other  facts.  He  will  magnify  out  of  all  just  pro- 
portion the  relative  value  of  his  own  testimony.  Any 
man  of  good  common  sense  would  make  a  better  jury- 
man. One  in  a  deep  well  sees  only  a  spot  of  the  sky.  Ne 
sutor  ultra  crepidam.  Do  not  understand  me  to  decry 
the  value  of  textual  criticism.  Its  achievements  have 
been  great,  though  its  work  is  well  nigh  done.  Nor  do 
I  deny  an  honorable  place  to  historical  criticism.  Every 
good  expounder  employs  it  and  every  good  commentator 
gives  much  valuable  space  to  it.  It  is  easy,  however,  to 
overestimate  the  relative  value  of  either.  An  exposition 
of  any  book  of  the  Bible,  however  remarkable  for  scholar- 


THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL  T 

ship  and  learning  in  textual  and  historical  criticism,  fails 
on  the  capital  point  of  interpretation  if  it  go  not  to  the 
heart  of  the  spiritual  matter  with  awakening,  illumining, 
soul-stirring  power  that  transforms  life,  moulds  character, 
and  uplifts  to  higher  destiny. 

On  this  account  Spurgeon's  or  Moody's  method  of 
Bible  exposition  will  save  more  souls  than  all  the  books 
ever  written  pro  or  con  on  textual  or  historical  criticism. 
On  this  account  the  commentaries  of  Barnes  and  Matthew 
Henry  will  produce  better  spiritual  results  than  Meyer's 
Commentaries,  evincing  greater  scholarship.  The  his- 
torical criticism  that,  in  my  judgment,  is  most  poisonous 
is  that  which,  in  the  name  of  Christianity,  attempts  to 
apply  to  Biblical  criticism  the  methods  and  conclusions  of 
an  unverified  heathen  hypothesis,  or  a  merely  speculative 
theory  of  philosophy.  Though  this  hypothesis,  or  theory, 
of  evolution  is  both  atheistic  and  materialistic,  and  re- 
pugnant per  se  because  unscientific,  yet  it  is  relatively 
harmless  coming  from  avowed  atheists  and  materialists. 
It  genders  poison  when  it  comes  in  the  name  and  guise 
of  Christianity.  In  countries  where  church  and  state  are 
united  and  religious  officers  are  appointed  by  political 
power  and  supported  by  the  state  purse,  we  may  not  be 
surprised  to  find  many  church  and  theological  dignitaries 
utterly  unregenerate.  But  yet  their  scepticism  goes  forth 
in  the  name  of  Christianity.  In  this  country  they  appear 
mostly  as  professors  in  so-called  Christian  schools  that 
are  not  responsible  to  any  organized  religious  bodies. 
Outside  the  Christian  camp  they  are  not  formidable.  But 
when  atheists,  deists,  materialists,  and  pantheists  pose  as 
the  only  reliable  expounders  of  Christianity,  then  the 
dishonesty  of  the  masquerade  smells  unto  heaven.  The 
poison  is  most  shrewdly  diffused  in  mixed  topical  dic- 
tionaries, encyclopedias,  and  commentaries.     As  the  arti- 


8  INTRODUCTION 

cles  of  a  dictionary  or  encyclopedia  or  the  comments  on 
the  several  Bible-books  are  assigned  to  different  authors 
(as  in  the  Cambridge  and  the  Expositors'  Bible),  there, 
side  by  side,  appear  rankest  infidelity  and  soundest  or- 
thodoxy. The  poor  young  preacher,  unable  to  buy  but 
one  Bible  dictionary,  or  religious  encyclopedia,  or  set  of 
commentaries,  knows  not  what  to  do,  and  his  safest 
friends  know  not  how  to  advise  him.  If  he  buys  the 
Cambridge  Bible  and  the  Expositors'  Bible,  all  the  light 
he  will  have  on  Daniel  must  come  from  Driver  and  Far- 
rar,  and  that  light  on  vital  points  is  darkness.  When  he 
turns  to  his  Pentateuch  he  may  find  the  Moses  of  his 
Genesis  unlike  the  Moses  of  Deuteronomy,  and  the  Moses 
of  Leviticus  no  Moses  at  all.  These  observations  are 
stressed  here  because  the  radicals  claim  their  most  assured 
results  in  treating  the  book  of  Daniel.  And  if  we  meet 
what  they  say  against  the  book  of  Daniel  we  need  not 
fear  them  on  any  other  book. 

The  German  conservative  critics  successfully  grapple 
with  the  German  radical  critics.  For  example,  in  Ger- 
many, Hengstenberg's  series  of  books  on  the  kingdom 
of  God  in  the  Old  Testament,  his  series  on  the  Christology 
of  the  Old  Testament,  his  series  on  the  Psalms,  his  series 
on  John's  Gospel,  his  single  volume  on  Ezekiel,  his  volume 
on  Revelation  are  all  mighty  and  valuable  in  exposing  the 
fallacies  of  the  radical  criticisms  of  his  brother  Germans. 
Hengstenberg  was  the  favorite  of  a  great  German  Em- 
peror. He  taught  in  the  University  of  Berlin.  So  much 
for  him  in  general.  His  volume  on  Daniel,  together 
with  the  pertinent  parts  of  his  Christolog}'',  constitute  a 
mine  of  information  and  an  arsenal  of  conservative  criti- 
cism. So  when  I  talk  about  books  on  Daniel,  I  sum  it 
up  this  way,  that  one  can  find  in  the  translation  of  Heng- 
stenberg on  Daniel  a  good  reply  to  all  the  radical  criti- 


THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL  0 

cisms  on  Daniel  by  his  fellow-Germans,  and  he  can  find 
in  Dr.  Pusey's  lectures  on  Daniel  (he  occupied  the  chair 
of  Hebrew  in  Oxford)  an  answer  to  all  of  the  radical 
criticisms  of  the  English  scholars  up  to  his  time.  Then 
in  Sir  Robert  Anderson's  "Daniel  in  the  Critics'  Den"  we 
have  the  most  masterful  reply  to  Driver  and  Farrar  to  be 
found  in  any  language.  In  the  first  place,  Sir  Robert 
Anderson's  book  looks  at  the  matter  as  a  judicial  inquiry, 
and  then  he  takes  the  main  points  and  states  them  so  one 
can't  misunderstand  them,  and  he  pulverizes  Farrar  and 
Driver  both.  That  book,  at  any  rate,  ought  to  be  in  every 
library. 

The  book  of  Daniel  is  written  in  two  distinct  languages. 
Commencing  with  the  first  chapter  and  going  to  the  fourth 
verse  of  the  second  chapter  it  is  written  in  Hebrew ;  then 
from  the  second  chapter  and  fifth  verse  to  the  end  of  the 
seventh  chapter  it  is  written  in  Chaldee,  or  Aramaic. 
From  the  eighth  chapter  to  the  twelfth,  inclusive,  it  is 
again  in  Hebrew.  So  we  may  say  that  all  of  it  is  in 
Hebrew  except  the  following  part:  Commencing  at  the 
second  chapter  and  third  verse,  on  to  the  end  of  the 
seventh  chapter  is  Aramaic,  and  we  find  about  three 
chapters  in  Ezra  in  Aramaic  and  one  verse  in  Jeremiah. 
So  as  Dr.  Sampey  says  in  lecturing  to  his  Old  Testament 
class,  "Whoever  wants  to  read  the  Bible  in  the  original 
must  know  Hebrew,  Aramaic,  and  Greek." 

Let  us  now  consider  the  position  of  the  book  of  Daniel 
in  the  Canon.  In  our  version  Daniel  comes  just  after 
Ezekiel,  but  in  all  the  present  Jewish  Bibles  there  is  a 
division  into  three  parts :  the  law,  the  prophets,  and  the 
holy  writings,  and  Daniel  is  put  in  the  third  class.  The 
radical  critics  have  rashly  made  that  an  objection,  saying, 
"It  is  not  ranked  with  the  prophets."  They  utterly  ignore 
the  principle  of  that  Jewish  classification.     The  principle 


10  INTRODUCTION 

is  to  put  among  the  prophets  those  books  written  by  men 
in  the  prophetic  ofifice,  Joshua,  Judges,  Samuel  and  Kings, 
for  instance.  Those  are  not  prophecies,  but  their  authors 
were  prophets.  David  was  a  prophet,  but  his  office  was 
king,  and  hence  the  Psalms,  containing  many  of  the 
greatest  prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament,  is  put  over 
in  the  third  division  like  Daniel.  Daniel  really  prophe- 
sies nothing  in  the  strict  sense.  He  simply  records 
prophecies  communicated  to  him  by  the  angel,  and  yet 
those  communications  are  intensely  prophetic.  There  is 
nothing  in  the  position  that  Daniel  occupies  in  the  Jewish 
order  of  books  to  speak  against  its  inspiration,  its 
canonicity  or  the  prophetical  character  of  it. 

Who  was  the  author  of  the  book  of  Daniel?  For  a 
long  time  the  radical  higher  critics  tried  to  make  it 
appear  that  there  must  be  at  least  two  authors,  one  to 
write  the  Chaldee,  or  Aramaic  part,  and  the  other  the 
Hebrew  part,  but  they  have  about  given  that  up,  and  it 
is  now  settled  that  whoever  wrote  one  part  of  Daniel 
wrote  the  other  part.  The  unity  of  the  book  is  practi- 
cally unassailable  and  inasmuch  as  one  part  of  the  book 
is  written  in  the  first  person,  repeatedly  saying,  "I, 
Daniel,"  whoever  wrote  that  part  also  wrote  the  other 
part.  So  the  author  of  the  book  of  Daniel  is  Daniel 
himself. 

Note  the  additions  to  the  Hebrew  text  of  Daniel  in  the 
Septuagint.  In  the  account  of  the  three  friena's  of 
Daniel  that  were  cast  into  the  fiery  furnace  about  the 
middle  of  the  chapter,  the  Septuagint  version  inserts  a 
song  of  these  three  Hebrews — quite  a  long  song.  That 
song  is  incorporated  in  the  Romanist  Bible.  Then  at  the 
end  of  the  book  of  Daniel,  the  Septuagint  has  two  extra 
chapters,  one  giving  a  story  entitled,  "Bel  and  the 
Dragon,"  and  the  other  giving  the  story  of  Suzanna. 


THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL  11 

I  have  referred,  particularly,  to  Farrar's  book  on  Daniel 
in  the  Expositors'  Bible  series  and  to  Driver's  book  on 
Daniel  in  the  Cambridge  Bible  series.  I  now  give  the 
summary  of  their  indictment  of  the  book  of  Daniel. 
Farrar  makes  eight  points : 

1.  There  was  no  Daniel.  The  book  is  a  historical 
novel  composed  by  some  pious  Jew  after  the  time  of 
Antiochus  Epiphanes. 

2.  There  was  no  deportation  in  the  third  year  of 
Jehoiakim  as  set  forth  in  Daniel  i  :i. 

3.  There  was  no  king  Belshazzar. 

4.  There  was  no  Darius  the  Mede. 

5.  It  is  not  true  that  there  were  only  two  Babylonian 
kings — there  were  five. 

6.  Nor  were  there  only  four  Persian  kings — there 
were  twelve. 

7.  Xerxes  seems  to  be  confounded  with  the  last  king 
of  Persia. 

8.  All  correct  accounts  of  the  reign  of  Antiochus  Epi- 
phanes seem  to  end  about  b.c.  164. 

Driver  divides  his  arraignment  into  three  general  grand 
divisions : 

I.  Historical  errors,  and  he  cites  nine  of  these  as  fol- 
lows: 

1.  The  position  of  the  Book  in  the  Canon  is  against  its 
prophetical  character. 

2.  The  omission  of  Daniel's  name  from  the  list  of 
worthies  in  Ecclesiasticus. 

3.  That  the  book  of  Kings  is  silent  as  to  the  siege 
mentioned  in  Daniel  1:1. 

4.  The  use  of  the  term  "Chaldean." 

5.  Belshazzar  is  called  "king"  and  he  is  called  the  son 
of  Nebuchadnezzar. 


12  INTRODUCTION 

6.  The  mention  of  Darius  the  Mede  as  King  of  Baby- 
lon. 

7.  The  mention  of  the  "Books"  in  Daniel  9:2  as  if 
the  Old  Testament  Canon  were  already  formed  at  that 
time  which  is  unhistorical. 

8.  The  incorrect  explanation  of  the  name,  "Belte- 
shazzar,"  in  4 :8. 

9.  The  improbability  that  strict  Jews  would  have  ac- 
cepted a  position  among  heathen  wise  men.  These  are 
what  he  calls  the  chief  historical  errors. 

II.  His  second  grand  division  is  philological.  The 
language  of  the  book  does  not  suit  the  time. 

III.  The  third  grand  division  is  on  the  theology  of 
the  book.  He  emphasizes  particularly  the  following 
points : 

1.  That  "the  culmination  of  the  book  is  in  Antiochus 
Epiphanes,"  which  shows  how  little  he  knows  about  the 
book  of  Daniel.  The  culmination  of  the  book  is  in  the 
first  advent  of  the  Messiah,  His  sacrifice.  His  enthrone- 
ment, and  His  second  advent  to  resurrection  and  judg- 
ment. 

2.  "The  book  manifests  little  interest  in  the  welfare 
of  contemporary  Jews."  As  a  sufficient  answer  to  that, 
read  Daniel's  prayer  in  chapter  9,  which  shows  how  much 
he  is  interested. 

3.  "The  minuteness  of  the  predictions,  embracing  even 
special  events  in  the  distant  future,  are  out  of  harmony 
with  the  analogy  of  prophecy." 

Note:  These  objections  on  the  part  of  these  two 
authors  will  be  answered  in  the  exposition  of  the  book. 

I  now  come  to  the  attestations  of  the  book  of  Daniel. 
The  Old  Testament  references  of  course  are  few,  as  he 
is  one  of  the  later  writers  of  the  Old  Testament,  but  the 


THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL  13 

following  are  very  clear :  Ezekiel  14 :  14  and  20,  expressly 
mention  Daniel,  and  then  28:3  gives  another  special  ref- 
erence to  the  wisdom  of  Daniel.  The  second  O.  T.  book 
which  I  mention,  Nehemiah,  records  the  prayer  of  Nehe- 
miah,  in  the  9th  chapter  of  that  book,  and  is  very  much 
like  Daniel's  prayer  in  the  9th  chapter  of  his  book.  Nehe- 
miah copies  Daniel's  prayer  and  shows  acquaintance  with 
it.  The  third  O.  T,  reference  is  to  the  visions  of  Zecha- 
riah,  who  came  after  Daniel.  Zechariah  evidently  had 
the  visions  of  Daniel  before  him.  The  Inter-Biblical 
references  (references  between  the  close  of  the  Old 
Testament  and  the  opening  of  the  New  Testament),  are, 
first,  the  first  book  of  Maccabees,  2  :  59, 60,  which  reference 
is  very  express.  Second,  the  Apocalyptic  literature  which 
arose  after  Daniel's  time  is  all  imitative  of  Daniel's  and 
Zechariah's  visions.  The  next  fact  I  cite  is  that  Daniel 
is  incorporated  in  the  Septuagint  version  which  was  pre- 
pared in  a  period  250  B.C.  down  to  150  B.C.  My  fourth 
item  is  that  Daniel's  place  in  the  canon  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment was  not  assailed  by  Jews  or  Christians  for  twenty- 
three  hundred  years.  The  fifth  fact  that  I  cite  is,  that 
in  our  Lord's  time  the  book  of  Daniel  is  in  the  hands  of 
the  people  as  a  part  of  their  sacred  Scriptures.  Josephus, 
who  was  apparently  a  contemporary  of  Christ,  and  cer- 
tainly lived  very  close  to  His  time,  since  he  writes  the 
history  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  is  very  express 
in  his  testimony  to  the  position  of  Daniel  in  the  Hebrew 
canon  and  is  careful  in  one  of  his  books  against  Apion 
to  prove  from  contemporary  heathen  authors  the  con- 
firmation of  Old  Testament  books  and  their  general 
veracity  as  history. 

When  we  come  to  N.  T.  references  to  the  Book,  one 
alone  ought  to  satisfy  every  man  who  claims  to  be  a 
Christian,  and  that  is  the  reference  of  our  Lord  in  His 


14  INTRODUCTION 

great  discourse  on  Mt.  Olivet,  to  the  book  of  Daniel,  the 
prophet,  and  to  a  specific  prophecy  of  Daniel  that  is  yet 
to  be  fulfilled.  We  see,  too,  that  our  Lord  adopts  the 
title  of  the  Messiah  given  alone  in  the  book  of  Daniel, 
"The  Son  of  Man,"  and  Daniel's  reference  about  Him 
coming  v^^ith  the  clouds  of  heaven.  We  find  also  in  the 
teachings  of  our  Lord  and  of  His  apostles  that  Daniel's 
prophecy  about  the  time  of  the  kingdom,  and  Daniel's 
prophecy  about  the  first  advent  of  the  Messiah,  and  the 
prophecy  about  the  second  advent  of  the  Messiah,  are  all 
endorsed  in  the  New  Testament.  We  find  also  that  Paul 
gets  his  idea  of  the  Man  of  Sin  from  a  preceding  Man  of 
Sin  in  Daniel.  We  find  that  Hebrews  ii,  in  citing  the 
sufferings  of  the  Old  Testament  saints,  includes  a  special 
reference  to  "the  stopping  of  the  mouths  of  lions,"  v^^hich 
took  place  in  Daniel's  case  alone  in  the  Old  Testament 
history.  We  find  that  the  v^arp  and  w^oof  of  the  book 
of  Revelation  is  founded  upon  the  prophecy  of  Daniel. 

I  now  come  to  the  Analysis  of  the  Book  and  we  ob- 
serve two  great  divisions : 

I.  The  history  of  Daniel  from  the  latter  part  of  the 
reign  of  Josiah,  king  of  Judah,  to  the  third  year  of  Cyrus, 
king  of  Persia. 

XL     The  prophetic  elements  of  the  book  of  Daniel. 

Now  let  us  consider — 

I. — The  History  of  Daniel. 

I.    Daniel  at  Jerusalem. 

(i)  Probable  early  history  there  in  the  reign  of 
Josiah  under  Assyrian  supremacy.  (See  Crockett's  Har- 
mony of  Samuel,  Kings  and  Chronicles  on  the  reign  of 
Josiah,  and  the  broader  Harmony  of  Kings  and  Chroni- 
cles including  pertinent  passages  from  Zephaniah  and 


THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL  15 

Jeremiah  in  Wood's  Hebrew  Monarchy,  and  Dean's  Life 
and  Times  of  Daniel,  pp.  i-6.) 

(2)  The  subjection  of  Jerusalem  to  Egypt  on  the 
Death  of  Josiah.  (See  same  authorities  referred  to 
above.) 

(3)  The  invasion  and  subjection  of  Jerusalem  by 
Nebuchadnezzar,  co-regent  of  the  new  power,  Babylon, 
with  his  father  Nabopolassar.  (See  same  authorities  and 
note  Daniel  1:1-2;  H  Chron.  26:6;  H  Kings  24:  i ;  Jer. 
36:11  ;  and  the  Chaldean  historian,  Berosus,  preserved  in 
Josephus,  contra  Apion,  i :  19,  and  Appendix  i  of  Sir 
Robert  Anderson's  "Daniel  in  the  Critics'  Den"  and  pas- 
sages 12-17  of  same  book.) 

(4)  Daniel  with  other  princes  led  into  exile. 

2.    Daniel  at  Babylon. 

(i)  His  royal  descent,  his  beauty  of  person,  his  at- 
tainments in  wisdom,  and  his  fitness  to  appear  in  a  king's 
court,  when  carried  to  Babylon,  i :  3-4. 

(2)  The  prescribed  three  years'  course  and  purpose 
of  his  further  education  in  Babylon,  i :  4-7. 

(3)  His  fidelity  to  the  Mosaic  law  in  meats  and 
drinks,  while  taking  this  course,  1:8-14. 

(4)  His  great  attainments  in  the  course,  i :  17-20  and 
5:12. 

(5)  Explanation  of  the  chronological  difficulties  sug- 
gested by  Daniel  1:1,5,  18 ;  2 :  i ;  Jer.  25  :  i ;  46 :  2. 

(6)  Daniel  expounds  Nebuchadnezzar's  dream  con- 
cerning the  luminous  composite  image  and,  with  his  three 
friends,  receives  great  promotion,  chapter  2. 

(7)  The  great  trial  of  Daniel's  three  friends  and  their 
greater  promotion,  chapter  3. 

(8)  Nebuchadnezzar's  dream  concerning  the  Great 
Tree  and  Daniel's  interpretation  thereof,  its  subsequent 


16  INTRODUCTION 

fulfillment,  and  Nebuchadnezzar's  resultant  proclamation, 
chapter  4. 

(9)  Apparently  Daniel  is  neglected  after  Nebuchad- 
nezzar's death,  but  has  a  vision  on  his  bed  in  the  first 
year  of  Belshazzar's  co-regency  with  his  father  Naboni- 
dus,  7:1,  and  another  vision  at  Shushan  in  Belshazzar's 
third  year,  8:  i. 

Then  he  interprets  the  handwriting  on  the  wall  at  Bel- 
shazzar's feast,  chapter  5.  In  this  section  we  consider 
the  historical  problem  of  Belshazzar  and  the  annalistic 
tablet  of  Cyrus. 

(10)  Daniel  in  the  days  of  Darius  the  Mede,  and 
Cyrus,  chapter  9  and  1:21  and  10:1. 

Note:  In  this  section  we  consider  the  historical  prob- 
lem of  Darius  the  Mede. 

II.    The  Prophetic  Elements  of  the  Book  of  Daniel 

These  elements  in  the  book  of  Daniel  are  chronological, 
connective  and  developing.  The  first  is  the  basis  of  all 
the  others  and  each  subsequent  one  develops  all  fore- 
going ones  by  some  elaboration. 

1.  Nebuchadnezzar's  prophetic  dream  of  the  five  world- 
empires  in  the  second  year  of  his  reign,  Daniel  2:31-45. 

2.  Daniel's  prophetic  dream  and  vision  of  the  four 
beasts  rising  from  the  sea  and  of  the  enthronement  and 
kingdom  of  the  Son  of  Man,  Daniel  7,  which  parallels 
and  elaborates  Nebuchadnezzar's  dream,  first  year  of 
Belshazzar. 

3.  Daniel's  prophetic  vision  of  the  Ram  and  the  He- 
goat,  elaborating  two  points  of  the  preceding  two  visions, 
Daniel  8.    This  was  at  Shushan,  third  year  of  Belshazzar. 

4.  The  70  weeks,  Daniel  9,  elaborating  a  point  in  the 
Fifth  Empire  concerning  the  first  coming  and  sacrifice  of 


THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL  17 

its  founder.     This  was  in  the  first  year  of  Darius  the 
Mede. 

5.  The  revelation  to  Daniel  on  the  Tigris,  the  third 
year  of  Cyrus,  Daniel  lo-ii,  which  elaborates  one  point 
concerning  the  third  world-empire  and  passes  to  the  fifth, 
culminating  in  the  second  advent  of  its  founder  and  the 
resurrection  and  judgment. 

QUESTIONS 

1.  What  the  quadruple  heading  of  chapter  i? 

2.  Show  how  it  is  both  logical  and  chronological. 

3.  What  attacks  were  made  on  the  book  from  without  and 
when  ? 

4.  Give  an  account  of  the  hostile  German  criticism  of  this 
book. 

5.  What  its  seven  deadly  sins? 

6.  In  what  two  English  books  may  we  find  the  substance  of 
this  criticism  and  how  is  each  characterized? 

7.  How  does  the  author  illustrate  the  relation  between  the 
German  and  English  criticism? 

8.  What  the  presuppositions  of  the  radical  critics? 

9.  What  can  you  say  of  the  spirit  of  the  radical  critics? 

10.  How  do  the  old  commentaries  compare  with  this  modern 
radical  criticism?     Illustrate. 

11.  What  the  telling  point  of  Sir  Robert  Anderson  on  these 
critics,  and  how  does  the  author  illustrate? 

12.  What  says  the  author  of  textual  and  historical  criticism, 
and  what  the  main  point  in  the  interpretation  of  any  book  of  the 
Bible? 

13.  What  discriminations  does  the  author  make  on  methods  of 
interpretation  ? 

14.  What  historical  criticism  is  the  most  poisonous?    Illustrate. 

15.  What  two  great  works  on  Daniel  commended,  and  what 
their  special  merit? 

16.  What  the  two  original  languages  of  Daniel,  and  what  parts 
of  the  book  in  each? 

17.  What  the  position  of  the  book  of  Daniel  in  the  canon? 
Discuss. 

18.  Who  the  author  of  the  book  of  Daniel? 

19.  What  the  additions  to  the  book  of  Daniel  in  the  Sep- 
tuagint  ? 

20.  What  the  sum  of  Farrar's  indictment? 

21.  What  the  sum  of  Driver's  indictment? 

22.  What  the  O.  T.  references  to  the  person  or  the  book? 

23.  What  the  Inter-Biblical  references? 

24.  What  the  N.  T.  references? 

25.  What  the  author's  analysis  of  the  book? 


II 

THE  HISTORY  IN  THE  FIRST  CHAPTER 

Scripture:  Dan.  1:1-21  and  all  references 

HAVING  devoted  one  chapter  to  an  introduction 
to  the  book  of  Daniel  we  now  come  to  its  expo- 
sition. We  closed  the  first  chapter  with  an 
analysis  which  consists  of  two  great  divisions,  namely : 

First,  the  history  of  Daniel. 

Second,  the  grouped  and  correlated  prophetic  sections. 

Following  this  analysis  we  will  dispose  of  the  his- 
torical sections  before  attempting  to  expound  the  related 
visions  and  dreams.  In  the  first  chapter  some  details 
belonging  to  introduction  were  left  to  be  considered  in 
the  exposition.  The  historical  character  of  this  book 
depends,  mainly,  upon  the  accuracy  of  its  references  to 
Jehoiakim,  Nebuchadnezzar,  Belshazzar,  Darius  the  Mede, 
and  Cyrus.  Of  course,  if  there  was  no  siege  of  Jerusa- 
lem by  Nebuchadnezzer  in  the  third  year  of  Jehoiakim, 
no  carrying  away  of  the  sacred  vessels  of  the  temple 
at  that  time,  no  deportation  of  captives  to  Babylon  at 
that  time,  no  Daniel  of  that  period,  no  Belshazzar,  and 
no  Darius  the  Mede,  and  if  the  references  to  the  fall  of 
Babylon  as  connected  with  Cyrus  are  radically  out  of 
harmony  with  the  true  history  of  Cyrus,  then  we  must 
abandon  all  ideas  of  the  book  as  history  or  as  inspired. 

The  most  important  of  all  these  references  as  bearing 
upon  the  historical  character  of  the  book  is  contained 
in  its  first  chapter,  which  is  intended  as  an  introduction 

18 


HISTORY  IN  FIRST  CHAPTER  19 

to  the  whole  book.  It  begins  thus:  "In  the  third  year 
of  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim,  king  of  Judah,  came  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, king  of  Babylon,  unto  Jerusalem,  and  besieged 
it.  And  the  Lord  gave  Jehoiakim,  king  of  Judah,  into 
his  hand,  with  part  of  the  vessels  of  the  house  of  God; 
and  he  carried  them  into  the  land  of  Shinar  to  the  house 
of  his  god :  and  he  brought  the  vessels  into  the  treasure- 
house  of  his  god.  And  the  king  spake  unto  Asphenaz, 
the  master  of  his  eunuchs,  that  he  should  bring  in  certain 
of  the  children  of  Israel,  even  of  the  seed  royal  and  of 
the  nobles ;  youths  in  whom  was  no  blemish,  but  well 
favoured  and  skilful  in  all  wisdom,  and  endued  with 
knowledge  and  understanding  science,  and  such  as  had 
ability  to  stand  in  the  king's  palace;  and  that  he  should 
then  teach  them  the  learning  and  the  tongue  of  the 
Chaldeans." 

This  paragraph  is  fundamental,  and  decisive  on  the 
question  of  historicity.    It  certainly  affirms: 

1.  A  siege  of  Jerusalem  by  Nebuchadnezzar  in  the 
third  year  of  Jehoiakim,  king  of  Judah. 

2.  The  submission  of  the  Jewish  king. 

3.  The  carrying  away  into  Babylon  of  a  part  of  the 
sacred  vessels  of  the  temple. 

4.  The  deportation  of  a  select  few  of  the  youths  of 
the  royal  seed  and  of  the  nobility  (including  Daniel, 
Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abednego,  as  named  in  verse  6). 

5.  It  affirms  also  by  implication  the  approximate  age 
of  these  youths  by  the  requirement  that  they  must  already 
be  "skilful  in  all  wisdom,  and  endued  with  knowledge, 
and  understanding  science,  and  such  as  had  ability  to 
stand  in  the  king's  palace." 

6.  Again  by  implication,  verse  4,  connected  with  the 
strict  adherence  of  these  youths  to  the  Mosaic  law  of 
meats  and  drinks  (verses  8-16)  must  affirm  an  environ- 


20  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

ment  at  Jerusalem  when  they  were  born,  and  during  their 
youth,  to  produce  such  education  and  character  as  they 
possess  when  introduced  into  this  story.  For  example, 
such  education  of  the  royal  seed  and  of  the  nobility,  and 
such  adherence  to  the  Mosaic  law  would  have  been 
impossible  in  Manasseh's  reign. 

7.  Finally,  the  whole  paragraph  affirms  a  political  sit- 
uation calling  for  its  alleged  facts. 

In  determining  the  historical  veracity  of  these  seven 
affirmations  we  may  look  for  confirmation  or  contradic- 
tion to  the  following  sources  of  information: 

1.  The  second  book  of  Kings  on  the  period. 

2.  The  prophecies  of  Jeremiah,  a  contemporary. 

3.  The  second  book  of  Chronicles. 

4.  The  book  of  Ezekiel,  a  later  contemporary, 

5.  Any  available  Chaldean  history  of  Nebuchadnez- 
zar's time. 

In  order  of  time  we  first  consider  affirmations  5  and  6; 
that  is,  do  we  find  in  Kings  and  Chronicles  a  Jerusalem- 
environment  that  could  produce  such  education  and  char- 
acter as  these  royal  youths  and  nobles  are  said  to  possess 
in  the  third  year  of  Jehoiakim?  The  answer  is  over- 
whelmingly in  favor  of  the  probability  of  the  story  in 
Daniel.  Jehoiakim  was  a  son  of  the  good  king  Josiah. 
Josiah  had  been  dead  but  a  little  over  three  years.  It 
was  in  the  i8th  year  of  Josiah's  reign  that  the  lost  book 
of  Moses  was  found.  The  finding  of  this  book  brought 
about  the  great  reformation,  the  great  revival  of  educa- 
tion, and  the  purity  of  court  life  that  distinguished  his 
reign.  Assuming  from  the  attainments  (Dan.  1:4)  that 
he  possessed  when  led  into  exile,  Daniel  could  not  well 
have  been  less  than  20  years  old  at  that  time,  so  that  he 
was  about  four  years  old  when  the  book  of  the  law  was 
found,  and  grew  up  and  was  educated  in  all  the  later 


HISTORY  IN  FIRST  CHAPTER  21 

glory  of  Josiah's  reign.  This  fact  accounts  for  both  his 
attainments  and  character.  (See  Kings  and  Chronicles 
on  the  reign  of  Josiah.) 

We  now  seek  for  confirmation  or  contradiction  of 
affirmations  i,  2  and  3,  i.  e.,  the  siege  of  Jerusalem,  the 
submission  of  the  Jewish  king,  the  carrying  away  of 
part  of  the  sacred  vessels.  Second  Kings  23:31-36  tells 
how  Pharaoh-necho,  after  slaying  Josiah,  deposed  his 
son  Jehoahaz  after  a  three  months  reign  and  set  Eliakim, 
another  son,  on  the  throne,  changing  his  name  to  Jehoia- 
kim  and  making  him  a  dependent  of  Egypt.  Then  the 
record  thus  continues:  "In  his  days  Nebuchadnezzar, 
king  of  Babylon,  came  up,  and  Jehoiakim  became  his 
servant  three  years :  then  he  turned  and  rebelled  against 
him.  And  the  Lord  sent  against  him  bands  of  the  Chal- 
deans, and  bands  of  the  Syrians,  and  bands  of  the 
Moabites,  and  bands  of  the  children  of  Ammon,  and  sent 
them  against  Judah  to  destroy  it,  according  to  the  word  of 
the  Lord,  which  He  spake  by  His  servants  the  prophets." 
On  the  same  point  the  Chronicler  says,  "Against  him 
came  up  Nebuchadnezzar,  king  of  Babylon,  and  bound 
him  in  fetters  to  carry  him  to  Babylon.  Nebuchadnezzar 
also  carried  off  the  vessels  of  the  house  of  the  Lord  to 
Babylon  and  put  them  in  his  temple  at  Babylon."  These 
accounts  corroborate  Daniel  thus  far: 

1.  That  Nebuchadnezzar  did  come  up  against  Jerusa- 
lem in  the  days  of  Jehoiakim. 

2.  He  did  receive  the  subjection  of  Jehoiakim,  who, 
had  been  subject  to  Eg}^pt. 

3.  He  did  carry  away  to  Babylon  a  part  of  the  sacred 
vessels. 

4.  Neither  gives  any  other  account  of  Nebuchadnezzar 
coming  up  against  Jerusalem  nor  of  the  deportation  of 
the  sacred  vessels  in  the  days  of  Jehoiakim.    While  they 


«f  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

do  not  date  the  coming,  nor  refer  to  a  deportation  of 
youths  of  the  royal  family  and  of  the  nobles,  they  say 
nothing  against  either.  So  far  as  they  testify  they  cor- 
roborate Daniel.  This  corroboration  is  enhanced  in  value 
by  the  fact  that  Kings  and  Chronicles  both  testify  that 
Nebuchadnezzar  took  Jerusalem  three  times : 

(i)  In  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim  (II  Kings  24:1;  II 
Chron.  36:6,  7),  which  Daniel  dates  in  his  third  year 
(Daniel  1:1). 

(2)  In  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim's  son,  Jehoiachin  (II 
Kings  24:  10-17  and  II  Chron.  36:  10). 

(3)  In  the  reign  of  Zedekiah,  brother  of  Jehoiakim 
(II  Kings  25:  1-12  and  II  Chron.  36:  17-21). 

And  in  every  case  there  was  a  deportation  of  captives 
and  of  the  sacred  furniture  of  the  temple ;  the  second 
time  the  deportation  of  both  was  larger  than  the  first  and 
the  third  time  larger  than  the  second.  It  was  ever 
increasing  severity  as  the  rebellions  were  repeated.  The 
corroboration  is  clinched  by  this  additional  testimony : 
Jehoiakim,  having  in  his  third  year  submitted  to  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, did  not  rebel  against  him  until  three  years 
later  (II  Kings  24:1),  and  so  there  was  no  reason  for 
a  siege  of  Jerusalem  in  the  campaign  following  the  battle 
of  Charchemish,  which  occurred  in  his  fourth  year  (Jer. 
46 : 2).  It  was  two  years  after  the  battle  of  Charchemish 
before  Jehoiakim  rebelled.  As  the  power  of  Egypt  was 
completely  broken  by  the  Charchemish  campaign,  this 
rebellion  could  not  have  been  formidable.  It  continued, 
however,  through  the  rest  of  his  reign.  In  the  latter  part 
of  his  reign  Nebuchadnezzar  prepares  to  punish  him. 
His  armies  arrive,  however,  after  Jehoiakim's  death  in 
the  three  months  reign  of  his  son,  and  before  the  siege 
is  concluded  Nebuchadnezzar  himself  arrives  (II  Kings 
24:10-12),  and  one  year  after,  the  campaign  following 


HISTORY  IN  FIRST  CHAPTER  23 

the  battle  was  closed,  for  we  find  Nebuchadnezzar  back 
in  Babylon  the  next  year  (Dan.  2:1). 

We  now  turn  to  Jeremiah  for  confirmation  or  contra- 
diction of  affirmations  i,  2  and  3.  The  only  prophecy 
in  the  book  of  Jeremiah  directly  against  Jehoiakim  is 
found  in  chapter  22 :  18-23,  which  has  no  bearing  on 
the  matter  in  hand,  unless  (which  is  barely  possible)  this 
expression,  "The  wind  shall  feed  all  thy  shepherds  and 
thy  lovers  shall  go  into  captivity,"  refers  to  the  deporta- 
tion in  his  third  year.  There  is  a  prophecy  against  the 
people:  "in  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  Jehoiakim" 
(Jer.  26:1).  There  are  prophecies  also  dated  in  the 
fourth  and  fifth  years  of  his  reign  (Jer.  36).  The  only 
passage  clearly  in  point  is  found  in  Jer.  35:11.  The 
chapter  begins :  "The  word  which  came  unto  Jeremiah 
from  Jehovah  in  the  days  of  Jehoiakim."  The  matter 
touches  the  Rechabites  who  thus  account  for  their  pres- 
ence in  Jerusalem :  "But  it  came  to  pass,  when  Nebuchad- 
nezzar, king  of  Babylon,  came  up  into  the  land,  that  we 
said,  come,  and  let  us  go  to  Jerusalem  for  fear  of  the 
army  of  the  Chaldeans,  and  for  fear  of  the  army  of  the 
Syrians ;  so  we  dwell  at  Jerusalem." 

On  this  strong  and  pertinent  testimony  note : 
(i)   Its  grouping.     It  is  immediately   followed  by  a 
prophecy  of  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim  (Jer.  36:1), 
and  that  immediately  by  an  account  dated  in  his  fifth 
year  (36:9). 

(2)  These  Rechabites  were  already  dwelling  in  Jeru- 
salem. 

(3)  They  had  left  their  homes  to  seek  safety  there, 
fleeing  before  an  invasion  led  by  Nebuchadnezzar  with  a 
combined  army  of  Chaldeans  and  Syrians.  Compare  the 
statement  of  the  Rechabites  with  II  Kings  24:1,  2, 
which  refers  first  to  Nebuchadnezzar's  invasion  of  Jehoia- 


24  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

kim,  and  adds:  "And  the  Lord  sent  against  him  (Jehoia- 
kim)  bands  of  the  Chaldeans,  and  bands  of  the  Syrians, 
and  bands  of  the  Moabites,  and  bands  of  the  children  of 
Amnion,"  from  all  which  appears  the  quadruple  com- 
position of  Nebuchadnezzar's  forces  in  his  first  invasion 
of  Judah. 

The  only  way  in  which  the  assailants  of  Daniel  i :  i 
seek  to  evade  the  decisive  force  of  this  testimony  from 
Jeremiah  is  to  arbitrarily  detach  it  from  its  grouping 
and  assign  it  to  the  latter  part  of  Jehoiakim's  reign,  in 
which  period  no  Bible  authority  puts  an  invasion  of 
Judah  by  Nebuchadnezzar.  Moreover  and  especially,  an 
invasion  in  the  latter  part  of  Jehoiakim's  reign  would 
jam  it  up  against  the  second  invasion  by  Nebuchadnezzar, 
which  occurred  in  the  three  months  of  Jehoiakim's  reign 
(II  Kings  24:8-12;  II  Chron.  36:8-10).  It  is  incredible 
that  there  should  be  two  such  invasions  by  Nebuchadnez- 
zar within  a  few  months.  Armies  could  not  have  been 
twice  mobilized  and  moved  such  distances  and  with  such 
transportation  in  such  short  space  of  time.  A  military 
man  with  the  maps  before  him  showing  how  a  Baby- 
lonian army  must  first  be  moved  up  the  Euphrates  to 
Charchemish,  thence  by  Damascus  to  combine  with  the 
Syrians,  thence  down  the  left  bank  of  the  Jordan  to 
combine  with  the  Moabites  and  Ammonites,  and  thence 
to  Jerusalem,  and  also  having  knowledge  of  the  country 
to  be  passed  over  and  the  transport  system  of  that  day, 
would  not  believe  it  possible  that  two  such  expeditions 
could  be  conducted  in  the  time-limits  arbitrarily  assigned 
by  civilian  critics. 

Dr.  Farrar,  in  a  paragraph  bristling  with  other  blun- 
ders, says,  "It  was  only  after  the  battle  of  Charchemish 
that  any  siege  of  Jerusalem  would  have  been  possible." 
Truth    reverses    this    statement.     It    was    only    after 


HISTORY  IN  FIRST  CHAPTER  25 

Nebuchadnezzar's  capture  of  Jerusalem  in  the  third  year 
of  Jehoiakim  that  the  battle  of  Charchemish  became 
possible.    This  is  the  reasoning: 

1.  Pharaoh-necho  was  lord  suzerain  of  Jehoiakim  (II 
Kings  23:34),  having  made  him  king, 

2.  In  the  third  year  of  Jehoiakim  Nebuchadnezzar 
invaded  Judah,  took  Jerusalem,  and  Jehoiakim  became 
his  servant.  But  Nebuchadnezzar  is  called  home  by  his 
father's  death,  and  himself  becomes  king  of  Babylon 
(Dan.  I :  i  and  Jer.  25 :  i). 

3.  Nebuchadnezzar,  being  away  and  his  armies  with- 
drawn, Pharaoh-necho,  who  had  been  mobilizing  his 
armies  during  Nebuchadnezzar's  invasion  of  his  depend- 
encies, marches  rapidly  against  Babylon  the  following 
year. 

4.  Nebuchadnezzar,  now  king,  has  time  only  to  meet 
him  at  Charchemish  at  the  passage  of  the  Euphrates, 
and  there  in  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim  gains  a  deci- 
sive victory  (Jer.  25:  i  and  46:2). 

5.  There  could  have  been  no  siege  of  Jerusalem  after 
the  battle  of  Charchemish,  and  in  that  campaign,  because 
Jehoiakim,  after  his  submission  in  his  third  year,  did  not 
rebel  until  his  sixth  year  (II  Kings  24:1,  2),  and  the 
campaign  commencing  with  the  battle  of  Charchemish  in 
his  fourth  year  (Jer.  46:2)  and  in  the  first  year  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  (Jer.  25:  i),  was  ended  that  very  year, 
for  we  find  Nebuchadnezzar  back  at  Babylon  in  his  sec- 
ond year  (Dan.  2:1). 

6.  What  the  united  and  unbroken  Bible  testimony 
declares  is  confirmed  in  some  of  its  details  by  the  Chal- 
dean historian  Berosus,  as  preserved  in  Josephus,  Ant. 
X,  II :  I,  and  Contra  Apion  i :  19.     Berosus  says — 

First,  that  Nebuchadnezzar  was  but  a  young  man  at 
the  time  of  his  first  westward  campaign  against  Egypt 


«(5  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

and  its  dependencies,  and  only  represented  his  aged  and 
infirm  father  Nabopolassar. 

Second,  that  while  prosecuting  this  campaign  he 
learned  of  his  father's  death  and  committing  "the  cap- 
tives he  had  taken  from  the  Jews,  Phoenicians  and  Syr- 
ians, and  of  the  nations  belonging  to  Egypt  to  some  of 
his  friends,  that  they  might  conduct  that  part  of  the 
forces  that  had  on  heavy  armor  to  Babylonia  by  the 
usual  circuitous  route,  while  he  himself  went  in  haste, 
having  but  a  few  with  him,  over  the  desert  to  Babylon 
and  became  king." 

But  Jeremiah  (25:1)  says  that  Nebuchadnezzar  did 
not  become  king  until  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim,  hence 
the  preceding  campaign  in  which  he  had  taken  "captives 
of  Jews"  was  in  the  third  year  of  Jehoiakim  and  so  har- 
monizes with  Daniel  1:1.  Only  a  desperate  radical  critic 
could  put  this  rapid  journey  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  "over 
the  desert"  after  the  battle  of  Charchemish  because 
(i)  the  straight  road  from  Charchemish  to  Babylon  was 
down  the  Euphrates  and  outside  of  the  desert;  (2)  there 
was  no  occasion  to  return  to  Babylon  after  that  battle,  as 
he  was  already  king  (Jer,  25:1)  ;  (3)  he  could  not  in 
that  battle  have  gained  "captives  of  Jews"  because  they 
submitted  the  year  before,  and  did  not  rebel  until  two 
years  after  the  battle  (Dan.  i :  i  and  II  Kings  24:  i). 

I  do  not  affirm  that  Berosus  or  Josephus  gives  clear 
accounts  throughout.  Both  of  them  muddle  and  jumble 
matters  as  if  they  were  radical  critics,  particularly 
Josephus  in  his  own  account  of  Daniel.  But  Daniel, 
Jeremiah,  Kings  and  Chronicles  coincide  throughout. 

We  have  already  said  that  the  first  chapter  of  Daniel 
affirms  by  implication  a  political  situation  to  justify  its 
statements.  That  political  situation  we  find  in  Kings, 
Jeremiah  and  Chronicles.     The  kingdom  of  Judah  in 


HISTORY  IN  FIRST  CHAPTER  27 

Josiah's  time  was  sandwiched  between  the  two  great 
powers,  Egypt  and  Assyria.  Judah  was  a  dependence 
of  Assyria.  Pharaoh-necho  slew  Josiah  and  broke  the 
Assyrian  power  at  the  first  battle  of  Charchemish  and 
deposed  one  son  of  Josiah  and  set  up  another,  Jehoia- 
kim,  tributary  to  himself.  But  in  the  meantime  Nabo- 
polassar  had  made  Babylon  a  greater  power  than  Assyria 
had  been.  He  would  not  rest  content  while  Egypt  held 
all  Syria  and  Palestine,  blocking  his  way  to  the  Mediter- 
ranean Sea.  So,  being  himself  old  and  infirm,  he  sends 
his  young  son,  Nebuchadnezzar,  to  follow  the  old  line 
of  invasion  adopted  by  Chedorlaomer  in  the  days  of 
Abraham  (Gen,  14)  ;  Syria,  Ammon,  Moab  and  Jeru- 
salem fall  before  him  (II  Kings  24:  i,  2,  and  II  Chron. 
36:6,  7;  Jer.  35:11;  Dan.  1:1).  This  the  third  year 
of  Jehoiakim.  News  of  his  father's  death  stops  his 
victorious  campaign.  His  armies,  with  the  prisoners,  are 
sent  back  the  long  way  they  had  come,  and  he  himself 
rapidly  returns  the  short  way  across  the  desert.  Arriving 
he  is  made  king.  Pharaoh-necho,  aroused  by  this  con- 
quest of  his  dependencies  and  encouraged  by  the  with- 
drawal of  Nebuchadnezzar's  army,  pushes  his  own  army 
rapidly  to  Charchemish,  the  strategical  passage  of  the 
Euphrates.  Nebuchadnezzar,  now  king,  meets  him  at 
Charchemish,  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim  and  first  year  of 
his  own  reign  (Jer.  46:1-12).  The  campaign  is  con- 
cluded in  the  year,  and  the  next  year  or  second  year  of 
Nebuchadnezzar  he  is  back  in  Babylon  examining  into 
the  proficiency  of  the  captives  taken  in  his  first  invasion 
(Daniel  2:1).  This  same  year  (second  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar's and  fifth  of  Jehoiakim's),  Jehoiakim  prepares  to 
rebel  against  the  solemn  warnings  of  Jeremiah  (Jer. 
36:9-31),  and  the  next  year  he  does  rebel  (II  Kings 
24 : 1 ) ,  and  thus  brings  about  the  second  invasion  by 


«8  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

Nebuchadnezzar  in  the  three  months  reign  of  his  son 
(II  Kings  24:  10-12). 

We  conclude  the  argument  on  this  point  with  the  tes- 
timony of  Ezekiel,  a  fellow-exile  and  contemporary  of 
Daniel,  given  some  years  later,  bearing  upon  the  fact  that 
Daniel  was  a  well-known  historical  personage,  and  bear- 
ing witness  to  his  remarkable  righteousness  and  wisdom. 
In  the  days  of  Abraham  God  promised  to  spare  Sodom 
if  ten  righteous  men  could  be  found  in  it.  But,  speaking 
concerning  the  awful  back-sliding  of  Israel  both  in  Judea 
and  in  exile,  God  says  twice  to  Ezekiel :  "Though  these 
three  men,  Noah,  Daniel,  and  Job  were  in  it,  they  should 
deliver  but  their  own  souls  by  their  righteousness"  (Ezek. 
14:  14,  20).  And  to  the  king  of  Tyre  he  says,  "Art  thou 
wiser  than  Daniel?"  It  is  not  merely  puerile  to  deny 
these  references  of  Ezekiel  to  the  Daniel  of  this  book 
and  ascribe  them  to  some  man  unknown  to  history  or 
tradition,  but  it  suggests  an  incorrigible  aversion  from 
the  belief  of  the  truth  akin  to  judicial  blindness.  Solo- 
mon's fame  for  wisdom  filled  the  world  when  he  was 
but  a  young  man.  And  to  decry  this  testimony  on  account 
of  Daniel's  youth  ignores  the  fact  that  God  gave  to 
Daniel  his  wisdom  as  He  had  given  it  to  Solomon,  and 
that  when  Ezekiel  wrote,  Daniel  was  in  his  prime  and 
occupied  a  position  of  world-wide  importance. 

We  have  thus  corroborated  every  historical  particular 
in  the  first  chapter  of  Daniel.  There  was  just  the  politi- 
cal situation  to  call  forth  its  alleged  facts.  Ezekiel,  a 
contemporary,  certifies  to  the  person,  righteousness  and 
wisdom  of  Daniel.  There  is  no  other  Daniel  known  to 
history  or  tradition  to  whom  his  words  can  apply.  The 
first  book  of  Maccabees  expressly  refers  to  the  Daniel  of 
this  book.  Our  Lord  expressly  certifies  to  his  person  and 
his  prophecy.    Zechariah  borrows  from  the  symbolism  of 


HISTORY  IN  FIRST  CHAPTER  29 

his  visions  and  Nehemiah  imitates  his  prayer.  Berosus, 
the  Chaldean  historian,  corroborates  the  statement  (Dan. 
1 : 1 ) ,  that  there  was  a  deportation  of  Jewish  captives  in 
Nebuchadnezzar's  first  invasion  of  Judea,  and  both  Bero- 
sus and  Jeremiah  confirm  his  statement  (Dan.  1:5 — 
"Three  years" — and  Dan.  2:1)  that  Nebuchadnezzar  was 
only  vice-regent  in  this  first  campaign,  but  became  king 
at  its  close. 

The  current  testimony  of  all  the  witnesses  explains 
how  this  first  campaign  roused  Eg>'pt  and  led  to  the  bat- 
tle of  Charchemish,  at  which  time  Nebuchadnezzar  was 
king  and  had  no  occasion  to  return  immediately  there- 
after to  Babylon,  but  finished  the  campaign  the  same 
year,  completely  breaking  the  power  of  Egypt  (II  Kings 
24:7),  and  was  back  in  Babylon  in  his  second  year 
(Dan.  2:1),  which  was  consonant  with  Jehoiakim's  fifth 
year.  That  Jehoiakim,  against  the  repeated  warnings  of 
Jeremiah,  rebelled  in  his  sixth  year,  though  Egypt  was 
not  now  in  position  to  help  him,  which  rebellion  led  to 
Nebuchadnezzar's  second  siege  of  Jerusalem  three  months 
after  his  death.  When,  then,  Kings,  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel 
and  Chronicles  corroborate  the  minute  particulars  of  this 
first  chapter,  and  both  Inter-Biblical  records  and  tradi- 
tions, and  the  whole  weight  of  New  Testament  authority 
confirm  it,  we  cannot  explain  Driver's  "doubt"  of  its 
accuracy,  nor  Farrar's  bold  denial  of  its  truth  on  any 
theory  of  fairness,  friendliness  and  reverence  toward  Old 
Testament  books.  If  the  reader  will  examine  the  first 
Appendix  to  Sir  Robert  Anderson's  "Daniel  in  the  Crit- 
ics' Den,"  he  will  find  the  statement  of  Dan.  i :  i  con- 
firmed by  the  strictest  test  of  chronology. 

The  statement  in  this  first  chapter  that  certain  noble 
youths,  remarkable  for  physical  beauty,  education,  wis- 
dom and  courtly  bearing,  were  led  captive  and  trained 


30  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

in  the  language  and  learning  of  their  captors  with  a  view 
to  service  in  the  palace,  is  in  line  with  all  oriental  history, 
ancient  or  modern.  The  attainments  of  Daniel  in  the 
learning  of  the  Chaldeans  finds  a  parallel  in  both  Joseph 
and  Moses  in  Egypt  under  somewhat  similar  conditions ; 
so  no  allegation  in  this  chapter  has  an  air  of  improbability. 
Having  thus  examined  at  length  and  critically  the  his- 
torical introduction  to  the  book,  we  may  advance  more 
rapidly  in  dealing  with  the  rest  of  the  historical  sections 
of  Daniel's  life,  which  extended  to  the  third  year  of 
Cyrus.  Modern  archeological  research  has  brought  to 
light  so  much  information  on  the  religion,  laws,  customs, 
learning,  architecture,  agriculture,  commerce,  business 
habits,  and  everyday  life  of  the  ancient  Babylonians  that 
we  may  construct  a  mind  picture  of  the  great  city  and 
its  people  as  Daniel  saw  them  six  hundred  years  before 
Christ,  that  would  be  almost  as  faithful  in  detail  as  a 
mental  impression  gained  by  a  visit  to  Paris,  Berlin  or 
London.  The  reader  will  find  just  such  a  picture  in  the 
second  chapter  of  Deane's  "Daniel,  His  Life  and  Times." 
By  all  means  read  it  and  extend  your  reading  when  you 
can  to  all  the  authorities  he  cites.  It  does  not  lie  within 
the  purpose  or  compass  of  these  discussions  to  go  into 
such  details. 

QUESTIONS 

1.  Upon  what  does  the  historical  character  of  this  book  mainly 
depend  and,  in  general,  what  the  argument? 

2.  What  the  most  important  reference  as  bearing  upon  the  his- 
torical character  of  the  book  and  what  relation  does  the  first 
chapter  of  Daniel  bear  to  the  whole  book? 

3.  What  the  affirmation  of  Dan.  1:1-4? 

4.  To  what  sources  may  we  look  for  confirmation  or  contra- 
diction of  these  affirmations? 

5.  What  the  proof  that  there  was  an  environment  in  Jerusalem 
conducive  to  the  education  and  character  of  the  royal  youths  such 
as  Daniel  and  his  comrades  are  here  said  to  have  had? 


HISTORY  IN  FIRST  CHAPTER  31 

6.  What  the  proof  of  the  siege  of  Jerusalem  and  the  carrying 
away  captives  in  II  Kings  and  how  confirmed  by  II  Chronicles? 

7.  What  the  proof  from  Jeremiah? 

8.  How  do  assailants  of  Dan.  i :  i  seek  to  evade  the  force  of 
the  testimony  of  Jeremiah  and  what  the  reply? 

9.  What  Dr.  Farrar's  statement  about  the  siege  of  Jerusalem, 
what  is  really  the  truth  of  the  matter,  and  what  the  arguments? 

10.  Wliat  the  testimony  of  Berosus  on  this  point  and  what  its 
bearing? 

11.  What  the  testimony  of  Jeremiah  on  this  point  and  what 
the  arguments  here  against  the  position  of  the  radical  critics? 

12.  What  the  proof  that  the  political  situation  at  that  time 
justifies  the  statements  in  the  first  chapter  of  Daniel? 

13.  What  the  testimony  of  Ezekiel  and  its  argument? 

14.  What  the  summary  of  the  proof  of  a  historical  and  per- 
sonal Daniel  ? 

15.  Give  a  restatement  of  the  facts  related  to  the  battle  of 
Charchemish. 

16.  What  the  circumstantial  proof  of  the  accuracy  of  the  his- 
tory in  the  first  chapter  of  Daniel  pertaining  to  the  "youths"  and 
what  parallels  in  the  Bible  of  this  case? 

17.  How  have  we  in  modern  times  become  acquainted  with  all 
the  details  of  life  in  Babylon  in  the  times  of  Daniel  and  Nebuchad- 
nezzar ? 


Ill 

THE  HISTORY  OF  NEBUCHADNEZZAR 

Scriptures:  Dan.  2 : 1-4 :  37 

THE  history  contained  and  involved  in  the  first 
chapter  of  Daniel,  because  it  is  fundamental  to 
the  rest  of  the  book,  and  because  it  is  most  con- 
tested, has  been  elaborately  examined  in  the  preceding 
chapter.  With  the  foundation  thus  firmly  established, 
we  may  proceed  more  rapidly  in  the  consideration  of  the 
rest  of  the  historical  sections  of  the  book. 

The  second  chapter  commences  with  an  important  date, 
the  second  year  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  We  have  seen  from 
the  preceding  chapter  that  Nebuchadnezzar  besieged  Jeru- 
salem, made  its  king  tributary,  and  led  Daniel  into  cap- 
tivity, in  the  third  year  of  Jehoiakim ;  that  on  this  expe- 
dition he  was  only  co-regent  with  his  father,  but  was 
called  home  suddenly  by  the  news  of  his  father's  death, 
so  that  in  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim  he  became  sole 
king  (Jer.  25 :  i),  and  the  same  year  as  king  he  defeated 
the  invading  Egyptians  at  the  second  battle  of  Charche- 
mish  near  the  fords  of  the  Euphrates  (Jer.  46:2),  The 
victory  was  so  decisive  that  he  finished  that  year  the 
campaign  which  gave  him  all  the  Syrian  and  Palestinian 
country  to  the  river  of  Egypt.  We  say  he  finished  the 
Charchemish  campaign  that  year,  for  this  chapter  (2:1) 
finds  him  back  in  Babylon  some  time  later,  doubtless  in 
his  second  year. 

It  is  in  this  year  he  had  the  dream  of  the  great  image 


HISTORY  OF  NEBUCHADNEZZAR         33 

destroyed  by  the  little  stone  cut  out  of  the  mountain,  or 
the  succession  of  five  great  world-empires  which  will  be 
considered  carefully  when  we  come  to  the  exposition  of 
the  prophetic  sections.  Because  of  his  interpretation  of 
this  dream  Daniel  and  his  friends  receive  great  honors. 
Our  record  says,  "Then  the  king  Nebuchadnezzar  fell 
upon  his  face,  and  worshipped  Daniel,  and  commanded 
that  they  should  offer  an  oblation  and  sweet  odours  to 
him.  The  king  answered  unto  Daniel,  and  said,  Of  a 
truth  your  God  is  the  God  of  gods,  and  the  Lord  of 
kings,  and  a  revealer  of  secrets,  seeing  thou  hast  been 
able  to  reveal  this  secret.  Then  the  king  made  Daniel 
great,  and  gave  him  many  great  gifts,  and  made  him  to 
rule  over  the  whole  province  of  Babylon,  and  to  be  chief 
governor  over  all  the  wise  men  of  Babylon.  And  Daniel 
requested  of  the  king,  and  he  appointed  Shadrach, 
Meshach,  and  Abed-nego  over  the  affairs  of  the  province 
of  Babylon:  but  Daniel  was  in  the  gate  of  the  king" 
(2:46-49). 

He  is  now  not  only  the  chief  of  all  the  wise  men,  a 
very  influential  body,  but  is  prime  minister  of  all  the 
empire.  As  it  is  a  world-empire,  the  governmental 
affairs  of  the  known  world  are  in  his  hands.  His  purity 
of  life  and  his  incorruptible  integrity  in  the  administra- 
tion of  public  affairs  soon  gives  him  such  a  reputation 
for  righteousness  throughout  the  world  as  later  to  call 
forth  a  tribute  from  his  fellow-captive  and  contemporary, 
Ezekiel,  which  associates  him  with  the  two  men  most 
remarkable  for  righteousness  at  that  date  in  the  world's 
history  (Ezek.  14:  14,  20). 

Tyre,  on  the  Phoenician  coast,  had  also  become  tribu- 
tary to  Babylonia.  But  the  king  of  Tyre,  meditating  the 
rebellion  which  would  soon  bring  Nebuchadnezzar  to 
destroy  his  city,  imagined  he  knew  more  about  politics 


84  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

and  public  administration  of  affairs  than  anybody  else. 
This  calls  forth  another  tribute  to  Daniel  by  Ezekiel 
when  he  ironically  says  to  the  king  of  Tyre,  "Behold, 
thou  art  wiser  than  Daniel ;  there  is  no  secret  that  is 
hidden  from  thee!"  The  reference  here  is  very  obvious 
to  Daniel's  God-given  wisdom  and  his  selection  by  the 
Almighty  to  be  a  revealer  of  secrets  set  forth  in  this 
second  chapter  of  Daniel.  And  the  pertinence  of  the 
allusion  becomes  more  apparent  when  we  consider  that 
it  is  Daniel's  wise  administration  of  the  world's  affairs, 
including  those  of  Tyre,  against  which  the  king  of  Tyre 
proposes  to  rebel.  There  is  nothing  in  the  world's  litera- 
ture more  exquisite  as  a  classical  gem  than  this  prophecy 
of  Ezekiel  against  Tyre.    (See  Ezek.  26,  27,  28.) 

When  we  consider  the  relation  of  Tyre  to  Daniel  and 
Babylon  at  this  very  juncture,  nothing  but  the  most  incor- 
rigible perversity  and  willful  blindness  could  induce  a 
radical  critic  to  refer  these  allusions  of  Ezekiel  to  a 
Daniel  unknown  to  history  or  tradition,  and  to  deny  their 
reference  to  the  well-known  Daniel  of  this  book^the 
only  man  on  earth  at  that  time,  before  or  since,  whose 
relations  to  the  matters  in  hand  could  justify  the 
allusions. 

Attention  is  here  called  to  the  frequent  instances  in 
history  when  alien  Jews,  on  account  of  their  capacity, 
have  been  promoted  to  the  management  of  national 
affairs:  Joseph  in  Egypt,  Daniel  in  Babylon,  Mordecai 
in  Persia,  Disraeli  in  England,  Judah  P.  Benjamin  in 
the  Southern  Confederacy. 

The  history  in  the  third  chapter  of  Daniel  relates,  not 
directly  to  him,  but  to  his  three  friends.  And  as  the 
record  is  so  plain  we  need  not  do  more  than  make  clear 
a  few  points  in  the  story.  That  Nebuchadnezzar,  in  his 
exaltation  to  the  sovereignty  of  the  world,  should  be 


HISTORY  OF  NEBUCHADNEZZAR         35 

inflated  with  abnormal  pride  and  count  himself  worthy 
of  divine  honors  is  no  strange  thing,  particularly  when  we 
call  to  mind  the  existence  of  that  evil  spirit,  the  prince 
of  this  world,  at  all  times  ready  to  tempt  men  to  idolatry, 
or  to  any  form  of  worship  that  will  deny  the  only  true 
God.  In  our  Lord's  great  prophecy  which  refers  to  the 
"abomination  of  desolation"  spoken  of  by  Daniel,  the 
prophet,  we  find  the  Greek  word,  "Bdelugma,"  translated 
"abomination,"  to  mean  an  idol,  an  image  for  worship, 
and  therefore  an  "abomination."  Probably  that  idol,  or 
image,  was  the  effigy  of  Caesar  on  the  Roman  standard 
which  the  soldiers  worshiped  by  imperial  command. 
There  is  a  thrilling  account  by  Josephus,  in  Jewish 
Antiquities,  of  the  revolt  of  the  Jews  because  Pilate  had 
the  legion  from  Cassarea  to  bring  these  idol  standards 
and  to  "introduce"  them  by  might  into  the  Holy  City. 
Inasmuch  as  the  desolation  of  Jerusalem  was  to  be  accom- 
plished by  Roman  armies,  and  as  these  armies  carried 
standards  on  which  were  idol  effigies  of  Csesar,  we  can 
see  why  Daniel  would  call  the  Roman  standard  an  abomi- 
nation of  desolation.  If,  much  later  in  the  world's  his- 
tory, all  the  Caesars  assumed  divine  honors  and  demanded 
worship  of  their  images,  we  should  not  find  it  incredible 
that  Nebuchadnezzar  should  erect  this  image  in  the  plain 
of  Dura. 

We  may  trust  a  radical  critic,  however,  to  find  some 
ground  of  objection  against  the  history.  Three  of  their 
objections  I  now  cite  and  answer,  as  follows: 

I.  The  available  gold  of  the  world  would  not  suffice 
for  the  material  of  that  colossal  image,  four  hundred 
feet  high  and  forty  feet  wide.  Those  who  are  familiar 
with  the  financial  arguments  of  Bryan's  first  campaign 
for  the  presidency  will  recall  "Coin's"  dramatic  descrip- 
tion of  the  smallness  of  the  room  whose  cubic  capacity 


S6  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

would  hold  all  the  gold  of  the  world.  But  these  critics 
ignore  the  fact  that  these  images  were  not  solid  but  hollow 
like  the  Statue  of  Liberty  in  New  York  harbor,  and  that 
probably  the  component  sections  were  not  solid  gold  but 
only  plated  or  gilt.  Gold  is  one  of  the  most  malleable  of 
all  metals.  A  single  grain  of  gold  can  be  hammered  out 
until  it  will  cover  fifty  square  inches.  It  would  not  have 
strained  Nebuchadnezzar's  credit  to  gild  or  plate  that 
image. 

2.  But  the  critics  blow  the  trumpet  of  doubt  when 
they  find  among  the  names  of  the  musical  instruments 
enumerated  in  verses  4  and  10,  one  or  two  Greek  words, 
which  they  say  could  not  have  been  known  in  Babylon  at 
this  date  and  therefore  the  author  must  belong  to  the 
times  after  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  It  is  hardly  worth 
while  to  notice  this  philological  objection  since  objec- 
tions on  the  ground  of  philology  have  been  either  vir- 
tually abandoned  by  many  of  the  later  critics  or  little 
stress  given  to  them.  It  is  true  the  book  of  Daniel  deals 
only  with  the  Greek  empire  prophetically,  commencing 
with  Alexander  the  Great,  yet  unborn,  but  Greek  lan- 
guage and  literature  preceded  Alexander  very  many  years 
and  were  widely  dififused  before  Daniel's  time.  The 
Greek  name  of  an  instrument  of  music  would  naturally 
follow  the  instrument.  From  the  time  that  Nebuchad- 
nezzar gained  the  Mediterranean  coast,  and  long  before, 
there  was  communication  with  Greece  (not  yet  an  empire 
of  course)  through  Phcenician  ships  and  overland  routes 
of  commerce  (read  particularly  Ezekiel  27).  But  Dr. 
Pusey,  one  of  the  ripest  scholars  of  Europe,  denies  that 
there  is  even  one  Greek  word  in  the  book  of  Daniel. 

3.  Of  course  they  regard  the  miraculous  preservation 
of  the  three  Hebrews  in  the  fiery  furnace  as  altogether 
incredible.     How  their  gorge  rises  in  them  when  a  mir- 


HISTORY  OF  NEBUCHADNEZZAR         37 

ade  appears !  A  close  student  of  Bible-miracles  cannot 
fail  to  note  that  they  appear  in  groups  of  great  epochs 
in  the  history  of  the  kingdom  of  God — the  times  of 
Moses,  of  Elijah  and  Elisha,  of  Isaiah  and  Daniel,  of  our 
Lord  and  His  apostles.  And  always  the  times  call  for 
mighty  demonstrations  of  Divine  power.  I  call  attention 
to  the  old  heathen  literary  maxim :  "Never  introduce 
a  god  into  your  story  unless  there  be  a  necessity  for  a 
god,  and  when  introduced  let  his  words  and  deeds  be 
worthy  of  a  god."  Of  course  the  author  of  the  maxim  is 
looking  only  to  an  artistic  standard  of  literary  taste,  and 
yet  his  words  contain  a  principle  that  justifies  all  Biblical 
miracles.  There  is  always  an  occasion  for  them.  They 
are  never  needless  or  out  of  harmony  with  the  conditions. 
And  particularly  in  this  instance  as  in  the  memorable  case 
of  Elijah  and  the  prophets  of  Baal,  there  was  a  distinct 
issue  between  Jehovah  and  idolatry  which  called  for  the 
divine  interposition,  as  we  see  in  verse  15.  These  three 
Hebrews  had  openly  refused  to  obey  the  king's  mandate 
to  worship  the  image.  They  were  formally  brought 
before  him  in  the  presence  of  his  people.  The  king  once 
more  peremptorily  demanded  obedience  and  challenged 
any  god  to  deliver  from  his  wrath  if  they  again  disobeyed. 

^sop,  in  one  of  his  fables,  justly  rebukes  a  wagoner 
for  calling  on  the  demi-god,  Hercules,  when  all  that  was 
needed  was  to  put  his  own  shoulder  to  the  wheel.  No 
human  power  could  have  helped  these  martyrs  in  that 
furnace,  and  only  the  supernatural  intervention  could 
have  brought  Nebuchadnezzar  to  his  right  mind.  The 
New  Testament  certifies  the  miracle:  "By  faith  they 
quenched  the  violence  of  fire"  (Heb.  11:34). 

One  incident  of  this  preservation  has  impressed  the 
world,  and  teaches  a  lesson  of  transcendent  importance 
to  God's  people:    "Then  Nebuchadnezzar  the  king  was 


88  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

astonished,  and  rose  up  in  haste,  and  spake,  and  said  unto 
his  counsellors,  Did  not  we  cast  three  men  bound  into 
the  midst  of  the  fire  ?  They  answered  and  said  unto  the 
king,  True,  O  king.  He  answered  and  said,  Lo,  I  see 
four  men  loose,  walking  in  the  midst  of  the  fire,  and  they 
have  no  hurt ;  and  the  form  of  the  fourth  is  like  the  Son 
of  God." 

The  great  lesson  is  the  actual  presence  of  God  with 
His  people  in  all  their  trials  and  afflictions.  This  time 
the  Presence  was  made  visible.  But  whether  visible  to 
the  natural  eye  or  only  to  the  spiritual  eye,  the  fact  of 
that  Presence  has  been,  throughout  'the  ages  of  unspeak- 
able comfort  to  all  persecuted  for  righteousness'  sake  or 
in  sore  straits  from  any  cause.  It  has  inspired  lofty 
songs  and  given  wings  to  praise.  David,  in  that  match- 
less hymn  concerning  the  good  shepherd,  sings: 

"Yea,  though  I  walk  through  the  valley  of  the  shadow 

of  death, 
I  will  fear  no  evil ;  for  thou  art  with  me ; 
Thy  rod  and  thy  staff,  they  comfort  me." 

It  is  the  glorious  assurance  of  the  great  commission: 

"Lo,  I  am  with  you  all  the  days,  even  unto  the  end  of 
the  world."  In  the  absence  of  our  Lord  in  heaven  this 
doctrine  of  the  Divine  Presence  prevents  the  sense  and 
loneliness  of  orphanage.  Says  our  Lord,  on  the  eve  of 
His  departure,  "I  will  not  leave  you  orphans.  I  come 
unto  you.  .  .  .If  any  man  love  me,  he  will  keep 
my  words:  and  my  Father  will  love  him,  and  we  will 
come  unto  him,  and  make  our  abode  with  him"  (John 
14:18,  23). 

Nebuchadnezzar,  an  outsider,  and  challenging  God's 
intervention,  needed  natural  sight  to  convince  him.  We 
need  it  not.    The  manifestation  of  the  Presence  is  more 


HISTORY  OF  NEBUCHADNEZZAR         39 

vivid,  more  realizable,  because  made  evident  to  the 
soul's  senses.  Let  us  keep  on  singing  that  grand  old 
Baptist  hymn : 

"Fear  not;  /  am  unth  thee;  O  be  not  dismayed! 
I,  I  am  thy  God,  and  will  still  give  thee  aid  : 
I'll  strengthen  thee,  help  thee,  and  cause  thee  to  stand, 
Upheld  by  my  righteous,  omnipotent  hand. 

"When  through  fiery  trials  thy  pathway  shall  lie. 
My  grace,  all-sufficient,  shall  be  thy  supply: 
The  flame  shall  not  hurt  thee ;  I  only  design 
Thy  dross  to  consume,  thy  gold  to  refine." 

To  the  end  of  time  the  reply  of  these  three  men  to 
Nebuchadnezzar's  imperious  demand  will  develop  moral 
heroes:  "Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abed-nego  answered 
and  said  to  the  king,  O  Nebuchadnezzar,  we  are  not  care- 
ful to  answer  thee  in  this  matter.  If  it  be  so,  our  God 
whom  we  serve  is  able  to  deliver  us  from  the  burning 
fiery  furnace  and  He  will  deliver  us  out  of  thine  hand,  O 
king.  But  if  not,  be  it  known  unto  thee,  O  king,  that 
we  will  not  serve  thy  gods,  nor  worship  the  golden  image 
which  thou  hast  set  up."  The  world  would  become  cor- 
rupt as  before  the  flood  and  evoke  condign  and  sweeping 
wrath  from  heaven  were  it  not  that  in  every  generation 
some  heroes  of  faith,  like  these  men,  arise  to  save  it  by 
their  sublime  devotion  to  the  paramount  law  of  God. 
The  whole  book  of  Daniel  breeds  heroes. 

More  than  once  already  have  I  called  attention  to  the 
variant  readings  of  the  Septuagint,  or  Greek  version. 
We  must  understand  first,  that  a  translation  is  not 
inspired.  Then  we  should  understand  that  Ptolemy,  king 
of  Egypt,  for  whose  great  library  this  version  was  made, 
was  seeking  literature,  not  religion.  Sometimes  this 
version  is  a  paraphrase,  not  a  translation.  Sometimes 
it  incorporates  traditions  and  even  whole  books,  belong- 
ing indeed  to  later  Jewish  literature,  but  not  found  in 


40  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

the  Hebrew  nor  reckoned  by  the  Jews  as  canonical. 
Hence  we  need  not  be  surprised  to  find  incorporated  in 
this  third  chapter  of  Daniel  a  section  longer  than  the 
rest  of  the  chapter.  It  sandwiches  between  verses  23 
and  24  sixty-seven  other  verses,  consisting  of  three  parts: 

First,  after  stating  that  these  men  had  fallen  down 
bound  when  thrown  into  the  furnace,  it  says  that  they 
arose  and  walked  in  the  flame.  Then  Azarias  (i.  e., 
Abed-nego)  ofifered  a  prayer  much  like  Daniel's  prayer 
in  the  ninth  chapter.  Indeed,  it  is  evidently  modeled  on 
that  prayer,  but  it  contains  one  untrue  statement,  which 
was  true,  however,  in  the  time  of  the  apochryphal  book 
from  which  it  seems  to  be  quoted. 

Second,  it  contains  a  brief  statement  to  this  effect: 
That  Nebuchadnezzar's  servants  kept  on  adding  fuel  to 
feed  the  flames  of  the  furnace,  but  that  God's  angel 
entered  the  furnace  with  the  martyrs  and  blew  all  the 
flames  out  of  the  furnace  and  made  all  its  interior  as 
cool  as  if  a  gentle  breeze  circulated  or  a  dew  were 
falling. 

Third,  the  consciousness  of  deliverance  leads  all  three 
of  them  to  burst  out  in  a  long  song  of  praise,  which  is 
little  more  than  quotations  from  some  of  the  Psalms. 

It  bears  the  marks  of  a  later  age,  and  unlike  the  reti- 
cence of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  it  seeks  to  explain  the 
process  of  the  miracle.  The  inspired  oracles  record 
miracles  in  the  simplest  and  briefest  language,  never 
stopping  to  attempt  an  explanation,  or  to  offer  an  apology. 
The  miracle  stands  naked  before  the  eye  and  is  left  un- 
clothed. 

The  fourth  chapter  of  Daniel  is  a  contribution  by 
Nebuchadnezzar  himself.  It  consists  of  a  proclamation 
which  recites  the  events  of  eight  years.  The  time  order 
of  the  events  is  as  follows: 


HISTORY  OF  NEBUCHADNEZZAR         41 

1.  Nebuchadnezzar,  though  a  great  king  and  a  pious 
one  according  to  his  reHgion,  was  going  far  astray 
through  pride  in  consequence  of  his  greatness  and  the 
exercise  of  his  sovereignty  over  the  world. 

2.  God  sends  him  a  dream  to  rebuke  him  for  his  sins 
and  to  warn  him  of  punishment  if  there  be  no  reformation. 

3.  This  dream  is  interpreted  by  Daniel  to  signify  the 
loss  of  his  reason  for  seven  years  and  his  expulsion  from 
the  throne  during  that  time,  and  his  becoming  as  a  beast 
of  the  field,  Daniel  closes  his  interpretation  with  this 
exhortation:  "Wherefore,  O  king,  let  my  counsel  be 
acceptable  unto  thee,  and  break  off  thy  sins  by  righteous- 
ness, and  thine  iniquities  by  showing  mercy  to  the  poor ; 
if  it  may  be  a  lengthening  of  thy  tranquility." 

4.  At  the  end  of  twelve  months,  the  king's  heart  being 
lifted  up  with  pride  as  he  contemplates  the  greatness  of 
his  city  and  the  glory  of  his  dominion,  the  dream  is 
fulfilled. 

5.  On  the  recovery  of  his  reason  he  blesses  and  praises 
Jehovah,  the  God  of  the  Jews,  and  acknowledges  His 
supremacy  over  all  governments  and  kings. 

The  dream  in  itself  was  a  marvel:  "Thus  were  the 
visions  of  mine  head  upon  my  bed :  I  saw,  and,  behold,  a 
tree  in  the  midst  of  the  earth,  and  the  height  thereof  was 
great.  The  tree  grew,  and  was  strong,  and  the  height 
thereof  reached  unto  heaven,  and  the  sight  thereof  to 
the  end  of  all  the  earth.  The  leaves  thereof  were  fair, 
and  the  fruit  thereof  much,  and  in  it  was  food  for  all, 
the  beasts  of  the  field  had  shadow  under  it,  and  the  birds 
of  the  heavens  dwelt  in  the  branches  thereof,  and  all  flesh 
was  fed  from  it.  I  saw  in  the  visions  of  my  head  upon 
my  bed,  and  behold,  a  watcher  and  a  holy  one  came  down 
from  heaven.  He  cried  aloud,  and  said,  thus.  Hew  down 
the  tree,  and  cut  off  its  branches,  shake  off  its  leaves,  and 


42  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

scatter  its  fruit:  let  the  beasts  get  away  from  under  it, 
and  the  fowls  from  its  branches.  Nevertheless  leave  the 
stump  of  its  roots  in  the  earth,  even  with  a  band  of  iron 
and  brass,  in  the  tender  grass  of  the  field;  and  let  it  be 
wet  with  the  dew  of  heaven ;  and  let  his  portion  be  with 
the  beasts  in  the  grass  of  the  earth ;  let  his  heart  be 
changed  from  man's,  and  let  a  beast's  heart  be  given 
unto  him ;  and  let  seven  times  pass  over  him.  The  sen- 
tence is  by  the  decree  of  the  watchers,  and  the  demand 
by  the  word  of  the  holy  ones ;  to  the  intent  that  the  living 
may  know  that  the  Most  High  ruleth  in  the  kingdom  of 
men,  and  giveth  it  to  whomsoever  He  will,  and  setteth 
up  over  it  the  lowest  of  men,"     Dan.  4: 10-17. 

The  great  lesson  which  the  dream  was  designed  to 
teach  is  thus  expressed :  "To  the  intent  that  the  living 
may  know  that  the  Most  High  ruleth  in  the  kingdom  of 
men  and  giveth  it  to  whomsoever  He  will ;  and  setteth 
up  over  it  the  lowest  of  men."  This  chapter,  as  all  of 
the  rest  of  the  book,  is  designed  to  affirm  and  demon- 
strate the  supremacy  of  the  government  of  God  over  the 
governments  of  men.  On  one  occasion  Dr.  Lyman 
Beecher  preached  a  sermon  on  "The  Government  of 
God."  The  impression  made  by  it  was  so  profound  that 
a  friend  inquired,  "Dr.  Beecher,  how  long  were  you  pre- 
paring that  sermon?"  He  replied,  "Forty  years,  and  the 
time  was  too  short  for  me  to  understand  the  comprehen- 
sion of  the  divine  rule."  The  dream  was  also  intended 
to  show  that  all  kings  and  governments  are  under  the 
inspection  of  heavenly  watchers,  and  when  the  measure 
of  their  iniquity  is  full  the  divine  judgment  will  certainly 
fall.  Any  man  who  cannot,  from  the  study  of  nature 
and  from  the  affairs  of  time,  find  out  that  there  is  a  God 
who  rules  over  heaven  and  earth,  classifies  himself  with 
the  brutes  that  perish.     As  this  dream  says,  "Take  away 


HISTORY  OF  NEBUCHADNEZZAR         43 

from  him  the  heart  of  a  man  and  let  the  heart  of  a  beast 
be  given  to  him." 

In  the  days  of  my  early  ministry  in  Waco  Mr.  Huxley's 
definition  of  an  agnostic  was  becoming  widely  accepted 
and  the  Darwinian  theory  of  evolution  as  set  forth  by 
Charles  Darwin  and  advocated  by  Herbert  Spencer, 
Huxley  and  Tyndall,  was  receiving  great  favor  in  literary 
circles  in  Waco.  After  reviewing  in  a  series  of  lectures 
the  "First  Principles"  of  Herbert  Spencer,  I  preached  a 
sermon  on  the  text  from  this  chapter,  "Take  away  from 
him  the  heart  of  a  man  and  give  him  the  heart  of  a  beast," 
and  used  these  expressions :  "An  atheist  is  a  fool ;  an 
agnostic  is  a  beast,"  following  out  the  thought  of  this 
chapter  that  one  too  ignorant  to  know  God  and  His  gov- 
ernment classified  himself  with  the  beasts.  The  evolu- 
tionists who  had  confidently  affirmed  a  brute  ancestry, 
objected  to  classification  with  their  parents. 

The  disease  which  came  upon  Nebuchadnezzar  was  a 
disease  well  known  to  medical  authorities  in  which  the 
subject,  through  mental  derangement  on  one  point,  imag- 
ines himself  to  be  some  beast  or  fowl  and  acts  as  if  it 
were  true;  that  is,  the  patient,  if  he  imagines  himself  to 
be  a  rooster,  flaps  his  arms  as  if  they  were  wings  and 
crows;  if  he  imagines  himself  to  be  a  dog  he  barks  and 
growls  and  snarls  like  a  dog;  if  he  imagines  himself  to 
be  an  ox  he  goes  on  all-fours  instead  of  standing  erect 
and  eats  grass  and  herbs  like  an  ox.  The  technical 
name  of  the  disease  in  Nebuchadnezzar's  case  is  "boan- 
thropy."  A  Greek  medical  writer  of  the  Fourth  Century 
A.D.  seems  to  be  the  first  to  notice  this  disease.  Doubtless 
during  the  seven  years  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  incompetency 
through  mental  disorder  regents  ruled  over  Babylon  for 
him. 

Is  it  credible  that  a  king  of  Babylon  would  issue  such 


44  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

a  proclamation?  In  this  book  and  in  other  books  of  the 
Bible,  near  the  times,  for  example  Ezra,  Nehemiah  and 
Esther,  we  find  kings  prodigal  in  proclamations.  It  is 
also  in  line  with  the  latest  discoveries  of  archeological 
researches,  that  kings  made  proclamations  or  recorded 
inscriptions  to  memorialize  the  great  events  of  their  own 
lives  or  of  the  history  of  their  people.  So  there  is  noth- 
ing incredible  in  the  proclamation. 

A  certain  sentence  of  this  chapter  in  the  Greek  version 
has  been  made  to  play  a  prominent  part  in  the  baptismal 
controversy.  See  in  the  Greek  version  the  rendering  of 
"and  his  body  was  wet  with  the  dew  of  heaven"  (verse 
33)  and  see  in  "Carson  on  Baptism"  the  reply  of  immer- 
sionists. 

QUESTIONS 

1.  What  the  subject  matter  of  chapter  2? 

2.  What  promotion  did  Daniel  and  his  three  friends  receive 
for  the  interpretation  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  dream  of  the  image 
and  little  stone? 

3.  Daniel's  righteousness  in  his  own  life  and  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  world's  affairs  called  forth  what  tribute  from  his 
contemporary,  Ezekiel? 

4.  How  would  his  political  position  as  prime  minister  bring 
him  in  contact  with  Tyre? 

5.  How  does  his  wisdom  in  administering  world  affairs  call 
for  another  tribute  from  Ezekiel  and  what  its  pertinence? 

6.  What  other  Jews  have  been  called  to  high  positions  in 
foreign  lands? 

7.  Show  the  naturalness  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  erecting  an 
image  of  himself  for  worship. 

8.  In  what  form  did  the  Roman  Caesars  have  themselves 
worshipped? 

9.  Give  the  account  in  Josephus  of  the  revolt  of  the  Jews 
because  these  effigies  of  the  Caesars  were  introduced  into  the 
Holy  City. 

ID.  Why  does  Daniel,  later,  call  these  effigies  "the  abomina- 
tion of  desolation?" 

11.  Give  the  size,  height,  and  breadth  of  Nebuchadnezzar's 
image. 

12.  What  the  objection  of  the  critics  to  the  golden  material  of 
the  image,  and  your  reply? 


HISTORY  OF  NEBUCHADNEZZAR         45 

13.  What  their  objection  to  the  names  of  the  musical  in- 
struments that  introduced  worship  of  the  image,  and  your  reply? 

14.  What  their  objection  to  the  miracle  of  preservation  in  the 
fiery  furnace,  and  your  reply? 

15.  What  incident  of  the  miracle  (3:24,25)  suggests  a  great 
doctrine  and  how  is  it  elsewhere  taught? 

16.  What  has  been  the  moral  effect  of  the  reply  of  the  three 
Hebrews  (Dan.  3:16-18)  to  Nebuchadnezzar? 

17.  Give  full  account  of  the  Septuagint  interpolation  in  this 
chapter — just  where  it  is  placed,  how  much  and  what. 

18.  How  do  you  account  for  these  extensive  additions  in  that 
version  ? 

19.  Who  is  the  author  of  the  fourth  chapter  and  of  what  does 
it  consist? 

20.  What  the  time  order  of  the  events? 

21.  Recite  the  dream  itself. 

22.  What  the  lesson,  or  design  of  the  dream,  and  what  great 
sermon  cited  on  "The  Government  of  God?" 

23.  What  use  was  made  of  Dan.  4:  16  by  the  author  and  what 
the  occasion  of  it? 

24.  What  was  the  disease  which  came  upon  Nebuchadnezzar? 
Describe  the  actions  of  one  who  has  it. 

25.  Is  it  credible  that  a  king  of  Babylon  would  issue  such 
a  proclamation? 

26.  What  sentence  of  this  chapter  in  the  Greek  version  has 
been  made  to  play  a  prominent  part  in  the  baptismal  controversy 
and  what  the  reply  of  immersionists? 


IV 
DANIEL  AND  BELSHAZZAR 

Scripture:  Dan.  5  : 1-30 

THE  title  of  this  chapter  is  "Daniel  and  Belshazzar." 
The  scripture  is  the  fifth  chapter.  It  will  be  re- 
called that  in  the  chapter  on  the  historical  intro- 
duction to  this  book  certain  matters  relating  to  introduc- 
tion were  reserved  for  the  exposition.  This  fifth  chapter 
on  Daniel  is  a  case  in  point.  We  are  here  introduced  to 
two  names  which  have  occasioned  much  controversy, 
Belshazzar  and  Darius  the  Mede.  Moreover,  there  are 
variant  readings  in  the  texts  and  versions.  Usually  the 
accepted  Hebrew  text,  the  Greek  version  of  Theodotion 
and  the  old  Syriac  Peshito  version  agree  on  the  text. 
The  chief  variations  are  found  in  the  Septuagint  version. 
It  is  a  safe  rule  to  follow  the  three  against  the  one  when 
we  come  to  a  variant  reading.  The  Septuagint-Daniel 
is  by  far  the  most  untrustworthy  of  the  Old  Testament 
books  in  that  version. 

Of  this  much  we  may  be  assured — that  neither  in  the 
accepted  Hebrew  text,  nor  in  the  Theodotion,  nor  in  the 
Peshito  Syriac,  nor  in  the  Septuagint  do  we  find  any  sup- 
port for  the  contentions  of  the  radical  critics  concerning 
Belshazzar  and  Darius  the  Mede.  No  text  or  version 
supports  any  one  of  their  main  contentions :  ( i )  That 
the  book  of  Daniel  was  written  by  an  unknown  Jew  after 
the  days  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes ;  (2)  That  there  was  no 
king  Belshazzar;    (3)   No  king  Darius  the  Mede;    (4) 

46 


DANIEL  AND  BELSHAZZAR  4T 

That  chapters  5  and  6  of  Daniel  cannot  be  reconciled  with 
the  discoveries  of  the  latest  archeological  research  on  the 
history  of  Cyrus. 

Much  has  been  made  in  this  controversy  of  what  is 
called  the  "Annalistic  Tablet  of  Cyrus,"  brought  to  light 
by  modern  research.  This  now  famous  tablet  is  very 
brief  and  is  so  much  broken  that  it  must  be  recon- 
structed ;  even  when  reconstructed  there  are  gaps  which 
cannot  be  supplied;  and  it  is  very  difficult  to  decipher 
what  is  inscribed,  so  difficult  that  the  experts  themselves 
cannot  agree  on  the  rendering.  But  the  most  of  them, 
including  Driver  himself,  support  a  rendering  in  substan- 
tial accord  with  the  book  of  Daniel. 

The  historians  of  the  period  such  as  Xenophon,  Her- 
odotus, Rawlinston  ("Ancient  ]\Ionarchies")  furnish  cor- 
roboration of  the  statements  in  the  book  of  Daniel,  what- 
ever may  be  the  merits  of  their  testimony.  But  what  is 
much  more  important,  the  Daniel  account  of  the  fall  of 
Babylon  before  the  Medes  and  Persians  is  in  line  with  the 
prophecies  of  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah  concerning  that  event, 
and  the  several  accounts  by  Isaiah,  Jeremiah  and  Daniel 
are  all  endorsed  in  the  book  of  Revelation,  giving  an  ac- 
count of  the  fall  of  the  mystical  Babylon  based  on  the 
Old  Testament  analogue  of  the  historical  Babylon. 

The  reader  will  find  Driver's  rendering  of  the  Cyrus 
tablet  in  his  book  on  Daniel  in  the  "Cambridge  Bible 
Series."  Prof.  Sayce's  rendering  may  be  found  in  Ap- 
pendix II  of  "Daniel  in  the  Critics'  Den"  and  also  the 
better  rendering  of  Mr.  Theo.  G.  Pinches,  by  whom  the 
tablet  was  brought  to  light,  and  the  rendering  of  Air.  St. 
Chad  Boscawen.  So  that  these  men — Pinches,  Boscawen 
and  Driver — with  others,  agree  in  deciphering  the  in- 
scription :  ( i)  In  harmony  with  the  book  of  Daniel ;  (2) 
Against  the  Sayce  rendering. 


48  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

If,  then,  we  rightly  regard  this  matter  as  a  judicial  in- 
quiry, all  its  evidence  to  be  compared,  cross-examined 
and  weighted  by  judicial  minds  according  to  the  laws  of 
evidence ;  and  if  we  accept  for  our  guidance  the  six 
fundamental  rules  of  law  touching  evidence  laid  down 
by  Mr.  Greenleaf  in  his  "Testimony  of  the  Evangelists," 
there  will  be  no  trouble  in  accepting  the  book  of  Daniel 
as  credible  history.     Mr.  Greenleaf 's  rules  are  as  follows: 

1.  "Every  document  apparently  ancient  coming  from 
the  proper  repository  or  custody  and  bearing  on  its  face 
no  evident  marks  of  forgery,  the  law  presumes  to  be 
genuine  and  devolves  on  the  opposing  party  the  burden 
of  proving  it  to  be  otherwise."  Now  under  that  law  we 
have  our  document  of  the  book  of  Daniel,  apparently 
ancient,  coming  from  the  proper  repository  or  custodian 
and  no  evident  marks  of  forgery  on  it,  and  that  document 
before  any  law-court  would  be  pronounced  genuine. 

2.  "In  matters  of  public  and  general  interest  all  per- 
sons must  be  presumed  to  be  conversant,  on  the  principle 
that  individuals  are  presumed  to  be  conversant  with  their 
own  affairs."  Now  apply  that  to  Daniel  living  in  Baby- 
lon at  that  time,  an  observer  of  the  transactions  which  he 
relates. 

3.  "In  trials  of  fact  by  oral  testimony  the  proper  in- 
quiry is  not  whether  it  is  possible  that  the  testimony  may 
be  false,  but  whether  there  is  sufficient  probability  that  it 
is  true."  Now  apply  that  law  to  every  statement  made 
in  the  book  of  Daniel. 

4.  "A  proposition  of  fact  is  proved  when  its  proof  is 
established  by  competent  and  satisfactory  evidence." 

5.  "In  the  absence  of  circumstances  which  generate 
suspicion,  every  witness  is  presumed  to  be  credible  until 
the  contrary  is  shown.  The  burden  of  impeaching  his 
credibility  lies  on  the  objector." 


DANIEL  AND  BELSHAZZAR  49 

6.  "The  credulity  due  to  the  testimony  of  a  witness 
depends  upon,  first,  their  honesty ;  secondly,  their  ability ; 
thirdly,  their  number  and  the  consistency  of  their  testi- 
mony; fourthly,  the  conformity  of  their  testimony  with 
experience;  and  fifthly,  the  conformity  of  their  testimony 
with  collateral  circumstances." 

We  can  then  understand  why  such  great  authorities  on 
evidence  as  Mr.  Greenleaf,  and  Lord  Chancellors  Hath- 
erley,  Cairns  and  Selborne  are  never  disturbed  by  the 
arrogant  claims  of  the  radical  critics.  They  never  forget 
that  "no  kind  of  evidence  more  demands  the  test  of  cross- 
examination  than  that  of  experts,  whose  proper  place  is 
the  witness  chair  and  not  the  judgment  seat." — Sir  James 
Fitzjames  Stephen,  in  his  "History  of  the  Criminal  Law," 
quoted  by  Sir  Robert  Anderson.  They  never  confound 
an  expert's  real  evidence  with  his  logic  or  the  conclusions 
of  his  mind.  On  this  very  point  Sir  Robert  Anderson 
most  pertinently  quotes  Lord  Hatherley,  in  his  "Con- 
tinuity of  Scripture"  speaking  of  "the  supposed  evi- 
dence, on  which  are  based  some  very  confident  assertions 
of  a  self-styled  higher  criticism !  Assuming  the  learning 
to  be  profound  and  accurate  which  has  collected  the 
material  for  much  critical  performance,  the  logic  by 
which  conclusions  are  deduced  from  those  materials  is 
frequently  grievously  at  fault,  and  open  to  the  judgment 
of  all  who  may  have  been  accustomed  to  sift  and  weigh 
evidence."  The  book  of  Daniel,  then,  as  a  "document, 
apparently  ancient,  coming  from  the  proper  repository  or 
custody,  and  bearing  on  its  face  no  evident  marks  of 
forgery,  the  law  presumes  to  be  genuine,  and  devolves 
on  the  opposing  party  the  burden  of  proving  it  to  be 
otherwise." 

Its  place  in  the  canon  of  Hebrew  inspired  books  was 
never  questioned  in  the  ancient  synagogue.    Our  Lord 


50  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

and  His  apostles  found  it  there  and  treated  it  as  inspired 
history  and  prophecy.  Only  one  man,  and  he  a  heathen, 
ever  assailed  its  genuineness  or  authenticity  for  more  than 
two  thousand  years.  The  chief  presupposition  of  mod- 
ern assault  upon  it  is  purely  atheistical ;  namely,  there 
can  be  no  real  miracle  or  prophecy  and  therefore  the 
book  must  be  accounted  for  naturally  (not  supernatur- 
ally)  and  must  be  dated  and  estimated  accordingly,  which 
begs  the  whole  question. 

On  the  premises  thus  briefly  set  forth  this  author  ac- 
cepts Daniel  as  a  competent  witness  of  the  matters  rela- 
tive to  Belshazzar  and  Darius  coming  under  his  own 
observation,  and  our  attention  will  now  be  given  to  that 
evidence.  All  its  references  to  Belshazzar  apart  from  the 
fifth  chapter  are  these :  "In  the  first  year  of  Belshazzar, 
king  of  Babylon,  Daniel  had  a  dream  and  visions  of  his 
head  upon  his  bed,"  Dan.  7:1.  "In  the  third  year  of 
the  reign  of  King  Belshazzar  a  vision  appeared  unto  me, 
even  unto  me,  Daniel,  after  that  which  appeared  unto  me 
at  the  first,"  8:1.  The  fifth  chapter  commences:  "Bel- 
shazzar the  king  made  a  great  feast,  etc.,"  and  closes 
thus :  "In  the  night  Belshazzar,  the  Chaldean  king,  was 
slain.  And  Darius  the  Mede  received  the  kingdom,  be- 
ing about  three  score  and  two  years  old." 

While  the  book  of  Daniel  does  not  say  anything  about 
Belshazzar's  father,  history  shows  that  his  father  was 
still  living  and  that  Belshazzar  is  called  the  king's  son. 
These  three  verses  then  suggest  that  he  was  co-regent  with 
his  father,  his  father  being  the  first  ruler,  he  the  second 
ruler,  and  his  proposition  to  make  whosoever  would  in- 
terpret that  handwriting  the  third  ruler.  The  critics  say 
it  should  be  "the  ruler  of  the  third  part,"  and  the  Septu- 
agint  version  seems  to  support  them,  but  the  Hebrew 
text  and  the  Theodotion  version  and  our  common  Eng- 


DANIEL  AND  BELSHAZZAR  61 

lish  version  and  our  Revised  Version  and  the  English 
Version  of  the  Jewish  text,  all  testify  that  the  render- 
ing should  be,  "the  third  ruler  in  the  kingdom,"  I  have 
before  me  the  Jewish  Bible,  that  is,  the  English  transla- 
tion of  the  Jewish  Bible,  and  on  the  5th  chapter  of  Daniel 
in  each  instance  it  renders  those  three  verses  that  I  have 
just  quoted  exactly  as  I  quoted  them.  It  reads  as  follows : 
"Whatsoever  man  will  read  this  writing  and  tell  me  its 
meaning  shall  be  clothed  with  purple  and  shall  have  a 
chain  of  gold  about  his  neck  and  shall  rule  as  third  in  the 
kingdom."  The  i6th  verse  puts  it  this  way,  "and  shall 
rule  as  the  third  in  the  kingdom."  The  next  verse  he 
interprets  "that  he  should  rule  as  the  third  in  the  king- 
dom." So  that  while  the  radical  critic  says  that  the 
rendering,  "the  third  ruler  in  the  kingdom,"  is  untenable, 
he  puts  himself  against  the  very  highest  scholarship  in 
Germany  and  England,  against  the  two  English  versions, 
against  the  Jewish  version,  against  the  Tlieodotion  Greek 
version,  and  our  common  Hebrew  text.  We  understand 
then  that  Belshazzar  was  king,  his  father  associating  him 
with  himself  in  the  kingdom.  We  learn  from  history 
that  Nabonidus,  his  father,  was  a  man  who  preferred 
privacy  and  seclusion.  He  had  very  little  to  do  with 
public  affairs.  He  was  not  even  in  Babylon  when  it  was 
invaded  by  the  Medes  and  Persians.  He  was  not  pres- 
ent when  they  took  Babylon.  He  commanded  no  armies. 
His  son  Belshazzar  is  represented  as  a  warlike  man,  a 
general,  and  whatever  war  there  was,  was  conducted  by 
Belshazzar.     We  look  then  at  the  next  affirmation. 

The  fifth  chapter  of  Daniel  says  thus:  "Belshazzar 
the  king  made  a  great  feast  to  a  thousand  of  his  lords, 
and  drank  wine  before  the  thousand.  Belshazzar  while 
he  tasted  the  wine  commanded  to  bring  the  gold  and 
silver    vessels    which    Nebuchadnezzar    his    father    had 


6«  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

taken  out  of  the  temple  which  is  in  Jerusalem,  that  the 
king  and  his  lords  and  his  wives  and  his  concubines  might 
drink  therefrom.  Then  they  brought  the  golden  vessels 
that  were  taken  out  of  the  temple  of  the  house  of  God 
which  was  at  Jerusalem,  and  the  king  and  his  lords  and 
his  wives  and  his  concubines  drank  from  them.  They 
drank  wine  and  praised  the  gods  of  gold  and  silver,  of 
brass,  of  iron,  of  wood,  and  of  stone." 

That  is  Daniel's  account  of  what  was  done  on  the 
night  of  the  awful  catastrophe  of  the  fall  of  Babylon.  I 
want  to  compare  that  with  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah  and  of 
Jeremiah  concerning  the  destruction  of  Babylon.  In 
Isaiah  21  we  have  this  account:  "My  heart  fluttereth, 
horror  hath  frighted  me ;  the  twilight  that  I  desired  hath 
been  turned  into  night  unto  me.  They  prepare  the  table, 
they  set  the  watch,  they  eat,  they  drink.  Rise  up,  ye 
princes,  anoint  the  shield."  Then  he  goes  on  to  give  an 
account  of  the  fall:  "Fallen,  fallen,  is  Babylon,  and  all 
the  graven  images  of  her  gods  are  broken  unto  the 
ground."  So  that  Isaiah  in  his  time,  prophesying  of  the 
fall  of  Babylon,  makes  the  occasion  of  the  fall  the  time 
when  they  are  at  the  table — when  they  are  eating  and 
drinking.  ^; 

I  take  a  passage  from  Jeremiah  -5I.:  30-32  and  39  and 
57:  "The  mighty  men  of  Babylon  have  forborne  to  fight, 
they  remain  in  their  strongholds,  they  become  as  women ; 
they  have  burned  her  dwelling  places ;  her  bars  are 
broken.  One  post  shall  run  to  meet  another  and  one 
messenger  to  meet  another,  to  shew  the  king  of  Babylon 
that  his  city  is  taken,  at  one  end.  And  that  the  passages 
are  stopped,  and  the  reeds  they  have  burned  with  fire, 
and  the  men  of  war  are  afifrightcd."  He  continues  in  the 
39th  verse:  "In  their  heat  I  will  make  their  feasts,  and  I 
will  make  them  drunken,  that  they  may  rejoice,  and  sleep 


DANIEL  AND  BELSHAZZAR  5S 

perpetual  sleep,  and  not  wake  saith  the  Lord.  I  will 
bring  them  down  like  lambs  to  the  slaughter,  like  rams 
with  he-goats."  Fifty-seventh  verse :  "And  I  will  make 
drunk  her  princes,  and  her  wise  men,  her  captains,  and 
her  rulers,  and  her  mighty  men ;  and  they  shall  sleep  a 
sleep  perpetual,  and  not  wake,  saith  the  King,  whose 
name  is  Jehovah  of  hosts." 

We  find  then  that  both  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah  represent 
the  downfall  of  Babylon  as  coming  when  they  are  at  a 
feast,  eating,  drinking,  and  drunken,  and  that  feast  ends 
with  their  sudden  destruction,  so  that  Daniel's  account  in 
that  affirmation  is  certainly  sustained  by  the  older 
prophets. 

We  now  come  to  the  next  affirmation,  Daniel  5:3,  4, 
18-24,  representing  that  this  is  a  conflict  with  Jehovah 
himself.  They  commence  by  insulting  Jehovah,  by  using 
the  sacred  temple  vessels  for  drinking  their  wine  on  such 
an  occasion.  They  not  only  drink  their  wine  out  of  the 
sacred  vessels,  but  they  praise  the  idols,  and  so  when 
Daniel  comes  in  he  makes  that  point  against  them  when 
he  comes  to  interpret  the  vision.  Let  us  see  what  he 
says  on  that  point.  Commencing  at  chapter  5 :  18,  Daniel 
says,  "Oh  thou  king,  the  Most  High  God  gave  Nebuchad- 
nezzar thy  father  the  kingdom  and  greatness  and  glory 
and  majesty,  and  because  of  the  greatness  that  he  gave 
him  all  of  the  peoples,  nations,  and  languages  trembled 
and  feared  before  him.  Whom  he  would  he  slew,  and 
whom  he  would  he  kept  alive,  whom  he  would  he  raised 
up,  whom  he  would  he  put  down,  but  when  his  heart 
was  Hfted  up  and  his  spirit  was  hardened  so  that  he  dealt 
proudly,  he  was  deposed  from  his  kingly  throne,  and  they 
took  his  glory  from  him  and  he  was  driven  from  the 
sons  of  men ;  and  his  heart  was  made  like  the  beasts,  and 
his  dwelling  was  with  the  wild  asses :  they  fed  him  with 


64  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

grass  like  oxen,  and  his  body  was  wet  with  the  dew  of 
heaven ;  till  he  knew  that  the  Most  High  God  ruled  in  the 
kingdom  of  men,  and  that  He  appointeth  over  it  whomso- 
ever He  will.  And  thou  his  son,  O  Belshazzar,  hast  not 
humbled  thine  heart,  though  thou  knewest  all  this.  But 
hast  lifted  up  thyself  against  the  Lord  of  heaven;  and 
they  have  brought  the  vessels  of  His  house  before  thee, 
and  thou,  and  thy  lords,  thy  wives,  and  thy  concubines, 
have  drunk  wine  in  them ;  and  thou  hast  praised  the  gods 
of  silver,  and  gold,  of  brass,  iron,  wood,  and  stone,  which 
see  not,  nor  hear,  nor  know :  and  the  God  in  whose  hand 
thy  breath  is,  and  whose  are  all  thy  ways,  hast  thou  not 
glorified ;  and  therefore  came  forth  that  hand  to  write  on 
this  wall." 

It  is  evident  from  what  Daniel  says  in  this  5th  chapter 
that  the  issues  were  between  Jehovah  and  Babylon  as  a 
nation  in  the  person  of  its  king,  Belshazzar.  Let  us 
compare  that  statement  in  Daniel  5  with  the  parallel  pas- 
sages in  Isaiah.  Several  chapters  of  Isaiah,  commencing 
with  the  45th,  are  devoted  to  that  very  point,  Isaiah  fore- 
shownig  the  destruction  of-  Babylon  and  its  reason,  and 
making  it  just  as  plain  as  Daniel  makes  it,  that  the  issue 
is  that  Babylon  was  set  up  by  divine  providence,  that  its 
kings  were  the  servants  of  God  to  do  His  will,  that  com- 
mencing with  Nebuchadnezzar  and  going  through  their 
history  they  had  failed  to  recognize  the  divine  govern- 
ment of  nations,  in  consequence  of  which  Isaiah  is  now 
prophesying  the  downfall  of  this  kingdom  of  Babylon. 
So  that  Daniel  5  stands  in  harmony  with  the  older 
prophet  upon  that  point.  There  are  two  or  three  chapters 
of  Isaiah  on  this  point  too  long  for  me  to  give  here. 

We  now  come  to  the  next  affirmation  in  this  chapter, 
and  this  relates  to  the  miracle.  It  affirms  that  during 
that  great  gathering,  the  thousand  lords,  the  wives  and 


DANIEL  AND  BEI.SHAZZAR  55 

concubines  of  the  king,  the  mad  revelhng,  the  impious 
resistance  to  Jehovah,  that  just  at  that  juncture  part  of 
a  hand  that  was  visible  came  out  and  wrote  on  the  wall 
these  words :  "Mene,  Mene,  Tekel,  Upharsin,"  Now,  of 
course,  if  a  man  takes  the  position  that  there  can  be  no 
miracle  or  anything  supernatural,  he  will  not  believe  any- 
thing of  this  king,  but  we  are  not  of  that  class.  Every- 
thing that  was  written,  as  I  will  show  you,  when  we  come 
to  interpret  it,  is  in  full  accord  with  everything  else  that 
is  written  in  the  Bible.  We  want  to  know  the  effect  upon 
Belshazzar.  The  testimony  is  very  striking  on  that.  Let 
us  see  what  was  the  effect  on  Belshazzar  when  he  saw 
that  hand  come  out  there  and  write  those  words :  "And 
the  king  saw  the  part  of  the  hand  that  wrote;  then  the 
king's  countenance  was  changed  in  him  and  his  thoughts 
troubled  him,  and  the  joints  of  his  bones  were  loosed  and 
his  knees  smote  one  against  another,"  What  a  vivid  de- 
scription of  fear  !  Now  when  we  turn  to  Isaiah  13  :  7,  8, 
we  find  there  described  the  condition  in  Babylon  on  the 
night  of  its  fall :  "The  hands  shall  become  weak  and  the 
mortal  heart  shall  melt  and  they  shall  be  affrighted ; 
pangs  and  pains  shall  seize  on  them.  They  shall  have 
throes,  as  a  woman  that  travaileth:  one  at  the  other 
shall  they  look  amazed:  red  like  flames  shall  their  faces 
glow." 

The  next  affirmation  that  I  wish  to  consider  is  that 
Belshazzar  is  represented  as  the  son  of  Nebuchadnezzar. 
Now,  says  the  higher  critic,  "This  is  not  true."  The  He- 
brew has  no  word  for  grandson  or  grandfather,  and  it  is 
one  of  the  most  common  things  in  the  usage  of  the 
Hebrew  to  represent  one  as  a  father  who  is  not  imme- 
diately the  father  of  the  one  spoken  of.  I  could  spend 
a  half  hour  citing  instances;  so  that  criticism  is  puerile. 
What  it  means  is  that  Belshazzar  is  a  descendant  of 


56  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

Nebuchadnezzar,  and  we  can  very  easily  account  for  this 
usage  of  the  term,  "father." 

We  come  now  to  the  next  affirmation,  that  is,  as  to  the 
agency  employed  for  the  destruction  of  Babylon.  This 
5th  chapter  of  Daniel,  when  it  comes  to  the  interpreta- 
tion, says  that  the  agency  employed  is  that  of  the  Medes 
and  Persians.  Not  the  Medes  alone  nor  the  Persians 
alone,  but  they  are  spoken  of  conjointly  and  they  are  so 
spoken  of  all  through  the  book  of  Daniel,  and  we  will 
need  that  later  on  when  we  come  to  another  criticism, 
that  the  Medes  and  Persians  all  through  this  book  are 
one  government,  two  governments  in  one.  Isaiah  and 
Jeremiah,  (and  I  here  cite  the  chapters  and  verses,  Isa. 
13 :  17 ;  21:2;  Jer,  51 :  28)  inform  us  that  the  agency  by 
which  Babylon  shall  be  destroyed  is  both  the  Medes  and 
Persians.  So  what  Daniel  says  here  is  in  full  accord 
with  the  testimony  of  the  older  prophets  as  to  the  means 
by  which  Babylonia  was  to  be  overthrown.  And  just 
here  I  want  to  make  this  statement  to  which  there  is  no 
reference  in  Daniel.  Xenophon  says  that  when  the  city 
was  besieged,  to  account  for  the  suddenness  of  the  cap- 
ture, that  the  Babylonians,  having  twenty  years  of  pro- 
visions in  it  and  resting  behind  their  high  impregnable 
walls,  did  not  concern  themselves  at  all  about  the  besieg- 
ing army  on  the  outside,  and  that  Cyrus,  finding  it  impos- 
sible to  storm  those  walls,  diverted  the  waters  of  the 
Euphrates  by  canals  going  around  on  each  side  throwing 
the  water  into  the  canals  and  leaving  bare  the  bottom  of 
the  river,  and  that  his  soldiers  entered  through  the  bed 
of  the  river  and  came  up  into  the  city  at  night  and  were 
in  the  city  before  anybody  knew  anything  about  it.  What 
Xenophon  says  is  confirmed  by  the  prophecy  of  Jeremiah, 
that  the  waters  of  Babylon  would  be  dried  up  in  order  to 
its  taking,  and  that  very  thought  is  repeated  in  Revela- 


DANIEL  AND  BELSHAZZAR  57 

tion  i6,  where  it  speaks  of  the  fall  of  the  mystical  Baby- 
lon :  "I  will  dry  up  the  Euphrates."  Then  we  can  easily 
understand  another  thing  said  by  Jeremiah  in  telling  how 
the  city  would  fall,  that  the  reeds  were  set  on  fire — the 
reeds  that  grew  along  the  banks  of  the  river  where  the 
bed  of  the  river  was  dry.  They  entered  that  bed  of  the 
river  and  came  up  on  the  inside  of  the  walls,  setting  fire 
to  those  reeds  that  were  along  both  banks  of  the  river 
on  the  inside  of  the  city.  All  of  that  is  thrillingly  set 
forth  in  the  prophecy  of  Jeremiah.  Daniel,  however, 
does  not  refer  to  that.  All  he  refers  to  is  the  sudden- 
ness— the  utter  unexpectedness — with  which  death  and 
ruin  came  upon  this  assembly,  but  this  does  make  Daniel's 
account  in  harmony  with  Xenophon,  Jeremiah,  and  Reve- 
lation, and  when  Jeremiah  says  that  the  Babylonians  did 
not  fight,  that  also  accords  with  a  part  of  that  celebrated 
Annalistic  Tablet  of  Cyrus  which  says  that  the  city  was 
entered  without  fighting.  Isaiah  also  confirms  the  sud- 
denness of  the  capture. 

We  take  up  the  next  affirmation.  Daniel  says  that 
when  that  handwriting  was  seen  on  the  wall  the  en- 
chanters and  diviners  and  soothsayers  were  called  in  and 
their  interpretation  sought.  Just  in  point  Isaiah's  testi- 
mony (47:  12)  announces  the  presence  of  these  enchant- 
ers and  soothsayers  and  their  powerlessness  to  help. 

Let  us  now  look  at  the  interpretation.  Daniel  inter- 
prets it  this  way,  that  the  first  word  written  and  repeated, 
"Mene,  Mene,"  means  "numbered,  numbered,"  and  he 
explains  it  to  mean  this,  "Your  days  are  numbered,  the 
days  of  your  kingdom  are  numbered ;  this  is  the  last  day." 
"Tekel" — that  means  a  weight,  or  weighed.  He  inter- 
prets that  to  mean,  "Thou  are  weighed  in  the  balances  and 
art  found  wanting."  "This  is  your  last  day.  This  day 
has  been  long  deferred.     God  has  labored  with  this  king- 


68  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

dom,  with  its  king  not  wishing  to  forsake  Babylon  to 
ruin,"  as  Isaiah  sets  forth  very  pathetically,  "but  thy 
constant  ignoring  of  the  government  of  God,  thy  filling 
up  of  the  measure  of  iniquity  has  brought  you  to  sorrow." 
"Numbered,  numbered  !  weighed  in  the  balances  and  found 
wanting!"  The  last  word,  "Upharsin,"  means  divisions. 
He  interprets  that  to  mean,  "Your  kingdom  is  divided 
unto  the  Medes  and  unto  the  Persians."  What  a  sug- 
gestion there!  Divided  unto  the  Medes  and  Persians! 
When  we  commence  the  next  chapter  we  find  that  Darius 
the  Mede  received  that  kingdom  and  was  made  king. 
Cyrus  was  the  true  leader  and  the  true  king,  but  it  was 
divided.  The  Medes  constituted  a  large  portion  of  this 
army  and  his  government,  and  Cyrus  appoints  this  Mede 
now  to  take  the  city  of  Babylon.  He  would  remain  as 
chief  ruler  over  all  Persia  and  Media  and  Babylonia,  but 
how  striking  the  significance  of  dividing!  What  a  great 
text !  Many  times  great  expounders  of  God's  word  have 
preached  on  that  subject.  One  man,  a  controversialist, 
has  written  a  book  called  "Tekel,"  in  which  he  says  of  his 
adversaries,  "Thou  art  weighed  in  the  balances  and  art 
found  wanting."  Some  of  the  most  thrilling  revival  ser- 
mons ever  preached  have  been  preached  upon  the  inter- 
pretation of  those  words,  "Mene,  Mene,  Tekel,  Upharsin." 

QUESTIONS 

1.  Apart  from  the  5th  chapter  what  are  the  references  in  this 
book  to  Belshazzar? 

2.  What  verse  in  this  chapter  implies  that  Belshazzar  was  not 
the  chief  ruler  in  the  kingdom  of  Babylon,  but  held  only  second 
place,  or  was  co-regent? 

3.  What  historical  and  archaeologic  evidence  confirms  this  im- 
plication? 

4.  What  can  you  say  of  the  Annalistic  Tablet  of  Cyrus,  and 
according  to  the  best  reading  of  its  inscription,  how  does  it  con- 
firm Daniel's  account  of  the  death  of  Belshazzar? 


DANIEL  AND  BELSHAZZAR  69 

5.  In  their  prophecies  of  the  fall  of  Babylon  show  in  what 
particulars  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah  confirm  Daniel  5. 

6.  How  was  Belshazzar  a  son  of  Nebuchadnezzar?  Give  other 
instances  of  scripture. 

7.  Does  this  fifth  chapter  say  anything  of  the  siege  of  Baby- 
Ion?     If  so,  what? 

8.  How  in  his  feast  does  Belshazzar  make  an  issue  against 
Jehovah,  and  how  does  Jehovah  respond? 

9.  What  means  were  employed,  according  to  Xenophon,  to 
obtain  an  entrance  into  Babylon,  and  how  does  Jeremiah  and 
the  book  of  Revelation  confirm  it? 

10.  Give  Daniel's  interpretation  of  the  hand-writing  on  the 
wall. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  DARIUS  THE  MEDE 

Scripture:  Dan.  5:31;  6 : 1-28 ;  9 :  i 

THE  testimony  of  Daniel  concerning  Darius  the 
Mede  is  found  in  the  last  verse  of  chapter  5,  the 
whole  of  chapter  6  and  the  first  verse  of  chapter 
9.  The  Jewish  Bible  properly  places  the  last  verse  of 
chapter  5  at  the  beginning  of  chapter  6.  From  these 
passages  we  gather  the  following  facts : 

1.  Darius  is  here  said  to  be  the  son  of  Ahasuerus,  of 
the  seed  of  the  Medes. 

2.  Darius,  like  Pharaoh  and  Caesar,  is  a  title  rather 
than  a  name. 

3.  He  "received  the  kingdom,"  i.e.,  from  another. 
He  "was  made  king,"  i.e.,  by  another, 

4.  He  was  an  old  man — "about  three  score  and  two." 

5.  Only  one  year  of  his  reign  is  mentioned,  9:  i. 

6.  As  elsewhere  throughout  the  book,  the  Medes  and 
Persians  are  considered  jointly  as  one  government  (verses 
8,  12,  15). 

7.  The  reign  of  Cyrus  and  of  Darius  were  contem- 
poraneous, 6 :  28. 

On  this  testimony  the  following  observations  are  sub- 
mitted : 

Observation  I.  It  is  difficult  from  outside  history, 
whether  sacred  or  profane,  to  determine  definitely  the 
real  name  and  place  of  this  Darius.  If  we  adopt  the 
Jewish  method  of  dividing  the  chapters  so  as  to  make 

60 


HISTORY  OF  DARIUS  61 

the  last  verse  of  chapter  5  the  first  verse  of  chapter  6 
then  there  is  nothing  in  Daniel's  account  to  connect 
closely  in  time  the  death  of  Belshazzar  with  the  accession 
of  Darius,  king  of  Persia,  so  often  named  in  the  book  of 
Ezra.  But  while  we  may  accept  the  chapter  division,  the 
conclusion  deduced,  identifying  this  Darius  with  the 
Darius  of  Ezra,  is  every  way  improbable,  not  to  say  im- 
possible. The  deduction  creates  far  greater  difficulties 
than  it  removes — difficulties  in  this  book  as  well  as  in 
Ezra,  and  even  greater  difficulties  in  Persian  history.  So 
our  conclusion  is  that  Darius  the  Mede,  the  son  of 
Ahasuerus,  in  this  book,  is  not  the  Darius,  the  Persian, 
the  son  of  Hystaspes,  so  prominent  in  the  book  of  Ezra. 
The  testimony  of  Daniel,  even  if  wholly  unsupported 
from  the  outside,  should  be  accepted  as  trustworthy  un- 
less better  testimony  should  show  it  to  be  impossible.  A 
probable  explanation  of  this  history  when  compared  with 
others  is  all  that  we  need  to  show. 

The  famous  Annalistic  Tablet  of  Cyrus,  upon  which 
the  radical  critics  so  confidently  rely,  itself  alone  fur- 
nishes the  probable  explanation.  That  tablet  shows  that 
a  certain  general  of  Cyrus,  Gobryas  by  name,  led  the 
night  assault  in  which  Belshazzar  was  slain,  and  was 
made  governor  of  the  province  of  Babylon  by  Cyrus, 
and  then  as  governor  appointed  all  the  subordinate  rulers 
in  the  realm,  which  harmonizes  perfectly  with  Daniel's 
account  that  (i)  Darius  "received  the  kingdom,"  "was 
made  king,"  and  (2)  that  "it  pleased  Darius  to  set  over 
the  kingdom  a  hundred  and  twenty  satraps."  Prof. 
Sayce,  though  so  adverse  to  the  historicity  of  Daniel, 
thus  reads  a  part  of  the  Annalistic  Tablet  of  Cyrus: 
"Cyrus  entered  Babylon.  Dissensions  were  allayed  be- 
fore him.  Peace  to  the  city  did  Cyrus  establish,  peace 
to  all  the  province  of  Babylon  did  Gobryas,  his  governor, 


62  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

proclaim.  Governors  in  Babylon  he  (i.e.,  Gobryas) 
appointed."  Prof.  Driver  thus  renders  another  part  of 
the  tablet:  "Gubaru  (same  as  Gobryas)  made  an  assault, 
and  slew  the  king's  son."  The  king's  son  was  Belshazzar. 
Then  the  tablet  goes  on  to  show  the  national  mourning 
for  the  king's  son. 

Defenders  of  the  historical  trustworthiness  of  the  book 
of  Daniel  need  not  commit  themselves  irrevocably  to  this 
identification  of  Daniel's  Darius  with  the  tablet's  Gobryas. 
It  suggests  all  that  is  necessary — a  probable  explanation. 
Mr.  Pinches,  who  brought  the  Annalistic  Tablet  to 
light,  and  many  others  are  quite  confident  of  this  iden- 
tity. Mr.  Thomson  ("Pulpit  Bible  on  Daniel")  adopts 
this  theory  in  his  exposition.  There  are  several  other 
theories  concerning  the  identity  of  Daniel's  Darius  most 
plausibly  argued  by  learned  men  who  fully  accept  the 
trustworthiness  of  the  history  in  the  book  of  Daniel.  It 
is  not  at  all  necessary  to  recite  them  here. 

Observation  2.  It  is  quite  in  line  with  all  the  proba- 
bilities in  the  case  that  Cyrus,  ruler  over  two  united 
nations,  Medes  and  Persians,  should  appoint  a  Mede  as 
sub-king  over  the  conquered  province  of  Babylon,  while 
he  attended  to  the  general  afifairs  of  the  whole  empire. 
The  reference  to  both  Cyrus  and  Darius  in  chapter  6 :  28 
indicates  a  contemporaneous  reign — Darius  as  sub-king  at 
Babylon,  Cyrus  as  supreme  king  over  the  whole  empire. 

Observation  5.  Darius,  being  an  old  man  when  he 
"received  the  kingdom,"  or  "was  made  king,"  did  not 
probably  reign  long,  Daniel  specifying  only  his  first 
year  (9:1). 

Observation  4.  The  contention  of  the  radical  critics 
that,  in  Daniel's  mind,  the  empire  of  the  Medes  precedes 
and  is  distinct  from  the  empire  of  the  Persians  is  con- 
tradicted flatly  by  the  whole  tenor  of  the  book.     While 


HISTORY  OF  DARIUS  63 

everywhere  recognizing  them  as  distinct  peoples,  the  book 
throughout  knows  them  only  as  a  conjoined  nation — one 
government.  The  laws  of  the  one  government  are  the 
laws  of  the  Medes  and  Persians  (6:8,  12,  15). 

This  unity  in  duality  is  manifested  in  the  symbolic 
features — the  silver  breast  and  two  arms  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar's image  (2:32) — the  bear  with  one  side  higher 
than  the  other  (7:5) — the  ram  with  the  two  horns,  one 
higher  than  the  other  (8:20).  This  last  symbol  is  ex- 
pressly interpreted  as  a  unity  in  duality  and  named 
"Medes  and  Persians." 

This  absurd  contention  of  the  radical  critics  is  evidently 
intended  to  hedge  against  any  possible  prophecy  in  the 
book  concerning  Rome,  as  the  fourth  world-empire,  and 
so  to  make  the  prophetic  forecast  of  history  culminate  in 
Antiochus  Epiphanes,  and  then  by  arbitrarily  dating  the 
book  after  his  reign,  to  deny  all  prophetic  element  in  it. 
In  no  other  radical  criticism  do  they  so  utterly  betray 
their  atheistic  presuppositions,  and  so  clearly  manifest 
their  utter  untrustworthiness  as  Biblical  expositors.  The 
very  exploit  which  they  regard  as  their  greatest  achieve- 
ment most  overwhelmingly  exposes  their  disqualifications 
and  advertises  their  shame. 

The  Contents  of  Chapter  6 

1.  On  the  fall  of  Babylon  and  the  death  of  Belshaz- 
zar,  Cyrus  appoints  Darius  the  Mede,  sub-king  over  the 
province  of  Babylon. 

2.  Darius  districts  the  kingdom  under  his  jurisdiction 
and  appoints  120  satraps  over  the  several  districts.  Over 
these  satraps  he  appoints  three  presidents,  Daniel,  one 
of  the  three,  to  whom  all  the  satraps  must  give  account 
of  the  king's  matters  in  their  several  satrapies.     This 


64  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

division  of  authority  and  responsibility  was  common 
then  and  is  yet  common  in  Oriental  countries.  The  three 
presidents  would  constitute  the  king's  cabinet.  From 
this  place  Farrar  gets  his  "board  of  three,"  but  his  arbi- 
trary attempt  to  transfer  it  back  to  a  preceding  regime 
in  order  to  break  the  force  of  "third  ruler  in  the  kingdom" 
(verses  8,  12,  15)  is  merely  puerile  and  amusing.  Daniel's 
age,  wisdom,  experience,  administrative  capacity  and 
character  so  easily  make  him  the  dominant  spirit  over  the 
two  other  presidents  and  over  all  the  satraps  that  Darius 
purposes  to  set  over  the  whole  realm  a  grand  vizier. 

3.  And  now  comes  a  development  so  true  to  the  life 
and  character  of  Oriental  despotism,  with  their  large  dele- 
gation of  powers  to  subordinates,  that  its  absence  from 
the  story  would  have  discounted  its  credibility.  Envy, 
jealousy,  and  disappointed  greed  on  the  part  of  the  two 
other  presidents  and  all  the  satraps,  lead  them  to  conspire 
against  Daniel.  It  was  bad  enough,  in  their  minds,  to 
have  him  one  of  three  presidents,  but  if  he  be  made  grand 
vizier,  then  there  would  be  no  hope  of  successful  fraud 
and  loot.  Daniel  here  brings  to  mind  that  great  com- 
moner, the  elder  William  Pitt,  who,  as  secretary,  stood 
alone  in  a  corrupt  age,  whose  spotless  character  and  im- 
perious will  dominated  an  unwilling  king  and  a  venal 
ministry,  before  whom  all  fraud  in  politics  and  peculation 
in  office  fled  affrighted.  One  such  man  in  a  thousand 
years  is  about  all  the  world  can  produce.  And  when  he 
appears  he  is  like  a  solitary,  huge,  cloud-piercing  granite 
mountain  in  an  almost  boundless  plain. 

What  a  tribute  to  Daniel's  purity  of  life,  official  integ- 
rity and  sublimity  of  character,  is  their  confession  that 
nothing  could  be  found  against  him  except  his  alien  re- 
ligion! But  just  here  these  jackals  were  most  sure  of 
their  lion.     His  record  was  unequivocal  and  univocal. 


HISTORY  OF  DARIUS  65 

Not  even  the  mighty  Nebuchadnezzar  could  shake  him  in 
a  matter  of  conscience  and  religion,  but  rather  bowed 
before  him.  On  this  point  he  was  as  God  himself  before 
the  white-faced,  pale-lipped,  knee-shaking  Belshazzar. 
Hence  the  low  scheme  of  cunning,  the  short-sighted  trick 
of  engineering  on  the  unsuspecting  Darius  the  signing 
of  a  blasphemous  law  that  for  thirty  days  no  man  should 
offer  prayer  or  petition  to  any  god,  but  to  the  king  alone. 
To  polytheistic  orientals,  or  even  to  a  Roman  Caesar,  who 
was  ex-officio  not  only  pontifex  maximus,  but  was  him- 
self divine,  such  temporary  suspension  of  empty  religious 
services  except  through  the  ruler  himself,  was  a  light 
matter  enough.  But  to  a  pious  Jew  recognizing  one  only 
true  God  it  was  every  way  blasphemous  and  horrible. 

In  all  the  world-history  of  legislative  folly  this  statute 
stands  unique — "without  a  model  and  without  a  shadow." 
The  suspension  of  the  law  of  gravitation,  the  suspension 
of  either  the  centripetal  or  the  centrifugal  force,  whose 
joint  powers  poduce  the  circling  orbits  of  heavenly  bodies, 
would  not  introduce  more  confusion  in  the  material  uni- 
verse than  such  a  law,  if  capable  of  execution,  would 
produce  in  the  moral  and  spiritual  realm. 

No  Prayer  to  God  for  Thirty  Days 

All  connection  between  the  throne  of  mercy  and  grace 
and  helpless,  hungering,  thirsting,  dying  men,  severed  for 
thirty  days !  For  a  whole  month  travailing  mothers  may 
not  cry  to  God ;  cradles  must  remain  unblessed ;  youth 
helpless  before  temptation ;  widows  and  orphans  at  the 
mercy  of  oppressions  and  without  appeal ;  human  life 
unguarded  in  the  presence  of  assassins ;  property  at  the 
mercy  of  the  thief,  the  burglar  and  the  incendiary ;  sin- 
ners dying  unabsolved  and  un forgiven,  an  earthly  em- 


66  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

bargo  against  angel  ministrations  or  heavenly  mercies — 
such  a  law,  if  enforcible,  would  be  the  climax  of  insanity. 
What  an  ocean-sweeping  drag-net  to  catch  one  fish ! 

How  clearly  the  record  brings  out  the  weakness  of 
Darius!  The  mind  instantly  calls  up,  in  association, 
Herod's  vain  regret  for  his  oath  when  called  upon  to 
surrender  John  the  Baptist  to  the  murderous  woman,  and 
Pilate  vainly  washing  his  hands  as  he  surrenders  Jesus 
to  crucifixion,  as  if  consistency  were  more  than  righteous- 
ness. 

Daniel's  calm,  inflexible  attitude.  Though  he  knew 
that  the  law  was  signed,  and  could  not  have  been  ignorant 
of  either  its  malicious  purpose  or  its  result  to  himself,  he 
kept  right  on  praying  to  God  at  the  three  regular  temple 
hours  of  prayer,  morning,  noon  and  evening. 

He  kept  his  window  open  toward  Jerusalem.  How 
well  he  bears  in  mind  the  words  of  Solomon's  great  in- 
tercession at  the  dedication  of  the  temple,  preserved  in 
the  sacred  history  of  his  people:  "If  thy  people  go  out  to 
battle  against  their  enemy,  whithersoever  thou  shalt  send 
them,  and  shall  pray  unto  the  Lord  toward  the  city  which 
thou  hast  chosen,  atid  toward  the  house  that  I  have  built 
for  thy  name:  then  hear  thou  in  heaven  their  prayer  and 
their  supplication,  and  maintain  their  cause.  If  they  sin 
against  thee,  (for  there  is  no  man  that  sinneth  not),  and 
thou  be  angry  with  them,  and  deliver  them  to  the  enemy, 
so  that  they  carry  them  away  captives  unto  the  land  of  the 
enemy,  far  or  near;  yet  if  they  shall  bethink  themselves 
in  the  land  whither  they  were  carried  captives,  and  re- 
pent, and  make  supplication  in  the  land  of  them  that 
carried  them  captive,  saying,  We  have  sinned,  and  have 
done  perversely,  we  have  committed  wickedness;  and  so 
return  unto  thee  with  all  their  heart,  and  with  all  their 
soul,  in  the  land  of  their  enemies,  which  led  them  away 


HISTORY  OF  DARIUS  67 

captive,  and  pray  unto  thee  toward  their  land,  which 
thou  gavest  unto  their  fathers,  toward  the  city  which 
thou  hast  chosen,  and  the  house  which  I  have  built  for 
thy  name:  then  hear  thou  their  prayer  and  their  suppli- 
cation in  heaven  thy  dwelling  place,  and  maintain  their 
cause,  and  forgive  thy  people  that  have  sinned  against 
thee,  and  all  their  transgressions  wherein  they  have  trans- 
gressed against  thee,  and  give  them  compassion  before 
them  who  carried  them  captive,  that  they  may  have  com- 
passion on  them." 

But  by  espionage  on  his  private  devotions  in  his  own 
domicile — the  most  accursed  method  of  tyranny — his  in- 
fraction of  human  law  is  clearly  established.  Peter  and 
John  when  charged  by  human  authority  "not  to  speak  at 
all  nor  teach  in  the  name  of  Jesus"  boldly  repHed: 
"Whether  it  is  right  in  the  sight  of  God  to  hearken  unto 
you  rather  than  unto  God,  judge  ye:  for  we  cannot  but 
speak  the  things  we  saw  and  heard."     So  Daniel  here. 

Daniel  in  the  Lion's  Den 

This  miraculous  preservation  of  Daniel,  though  its 
miracle  sorely  grieves  the  radical  critics,  is,  like  the  pres- 
ervation of  his  three  friends  in  the  fiery  furnace,  certi- 
fied in  the  New  Testament  book  of  Hebrews,  which  re- 
cords among  the  achievements  wrought  by  Israel's  an- 
cient worthies :  "By  faith  they  quenched  the  violence  of 
fire — by  faith  they  stopped  the  mouths  of  lions."  The 
fate  of  Daniel's  accusers  when  he  was  vindicated  is  fully 
in  line  with  the  history  of  Oriental  nations  as  well  as 
the  law  of  Moses.  The  consequent  proclamation  of 
Darius  is  not  incredible  per  se,  because  in  keeping  with 
his  character,  his  times,  and  his  people.  It  is  in  line  with 
other  proclamations  in  this  book,  in  Ezra,  Nehemiah  and 
Esther. 


68  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

I  must  again  call  attention  to  this  fact  concerning  the 
text:  The  accepted  Hebrew  text,  Theodotion's  Greek 
version  in  the  second  century  a.d.,  and  the  Peshito  Syriac 
version  of  the  same  century  are  generally  agreed.  The 
important  variant  readings  are  in  the  Septuagint  Greek 
version.  That  version,  for  example,  makes  only  the 
two  other  presidents  (not  the  satraps)  accuse  Daniel,  and 
they  alone,  with  their  families  (not  the  satraps)  are  cast 
in  the  lion's  den  when  Daniel  is  vindicated.  I  have  not 
thought  it  necessary  to  give  all  the  Septuagint  variations. 

QUESTIONS 

1.  What  the  affirmations  in  Dan.  5 :  30,  6  and  9 :  i  concerning 
Darius  tlie  Mede? 

2.  Is  he  the  same  as  the  Darius  of  the  book  of  Ezra?  What 
the  proof? 

3.  State  the  archaeological  proof  that  he  was  probably  Gobryas. 

4.  Give  the  reply  to  the  radical  critic  contention  that,  in 
Daniel's  mind,  the  kingdom  of  the  Medes  was  distinct  from  the 
Persian  kingdom  and  preceded  it. 

5.  By  whom  and  why  a  conspiracy  against  Daniel,  and  what 
their  method  of  destroying  him? 

6.  State  the  comparison  of  Daniel  with  William  Pitt. 

7.  Show  the  folly  of  the  statute  Darius  was  induced  to  sign. 

8.  What  the  weakness  of  Darius  and  with  whom  compared? 

9.  From  what  texts  and  versions  must  we  get  a  true  text  of 
Daniel,  and  which  of  these  are  in  agreement  and  which  one 
variant? 

10.  State  the  most  important  variations  in  the  Septuagint. 


VI 


THE  RELATED  PROPHETIC  SECTIONS  OF 
DANIEL 

Scripture:  All  references 

HAVING  completed  the  historical  sections  of  this 
book,  we  now  consider  the  related  prophetic  sec- 
tions. It  is  here  we  find  the  crux  of  the  opposi- 
tion of  the  atheistic  critics.  Their  presupposition  is: 
There  can  be  no  prophecy  in  any  supernatural  sense. 
Therefore  they  refuse  to  see  any  reference  in  the  book  to 
matters  beyond  the  times  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  He 
to  them  is  the  culmination  of  the  book.  The  unknown 
writer,  as  they  claimed,  lived  after  his  times,  and  cast 
well-known  history  into  the  form  of  prophecy,  attribut- 
ing its  authorship,  through  a  license  accorded  to  writers 
of  novels,  to  a  fictitious  Daniel  supposed  to  be  living  in 
the  period  betwene  Nebuchadnezzar  and  Cyrus. 

A  complete  answer  to  both  their  premise  and  conclu- 
sion would  be  the  proof  of  even  one  real  prediction  in 
the  book,  fulfilled  after  their  own  assigned  date  for  the 
author.  Any  one  who  really  believes  the  New  Testament 
will  find  that  proof  in  the  words  of  our  Lord:  "When 
therefore  ye  see  the  abomination  of  desolation  which  was 
spoken  of  by  Daniel  the  prophet,  standing  in  the  Holy 
Place  (let  him  that  readeth  understand)  then  let  them 
that  are  in  Judea  flee  to  the  mountains." 

But  as  our  purpose  is  to  expound  the  prophetic  sec- 
tions of  this  book,  and  not  merely  to  reply  to  the  conten- 

69 


70  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

tions  of  atheists,  we  now  take  up  our  work.     These  are 
the  prophetic  sections : 

1.  Nebuchadnezzar's  first  dream  of  the  great  and 
luminous  image,  or  the  five  world-empires,  Dan.  2:31-45. 

2.  Nebuchadnezzar's  second  dream  of  the  great  tree, 
or  what  befell  the  great  king  of  the  first  world-empire, 
Dan.  4 :  10-27. 

3.  The  handwriting  on  the  wall  at  Belshazzar's  feast, 
or  what  befell  the  last  king  of  the  first  world-empire  and 
how  the  second  empire  comes  to  the  front,  Dan.  5 :  25-28. 

4.  The  vision  of  the  four  great  beasts  arising  from 
the  sea,  representing  in  another  form  the  four  secular 
world-empires  and  the  enthronement  of  the  king  of  the 
fifth  world-empire,  Dan.  7:  1-28. 

5.  The  vision  of  the  ram  and  the  he-goat,  or  the  for- 
tunes of  the  second  and  third  world-empires,  Dan.  8:  1-27. 

6.  The  seventy  weeks,  or  the  coming  and  sacrifice  of 
the  Messiah,  the  King  of  the  fifth  world-empire,  Dan. 
9 :  24-27. 

7.  The  vision  of  the  Son  of  Man,  Dan.  10. 

8.  Revelation  of  the  conflicts  between  two  of  the 
divisions  of  the  third  world-empire,  and  the  transition  to 
the  final  advent  of  the  Messiah,  the  King  of  the  fifth 
world-empire,  Dan.  11  and  12. 

On  these  eight  prophetic  sections  let  us  give  careful  at- 
tention to  the  following  observations : 

Observations  on  the  Eight  Prophecies  Taken 
Together 

I.  The  most  casual  glance  at  this  grouping  of  the 
several  prophetic  sections  reveals  both  the  unity  of  the 
book  and  the  relation  of  its  prophetic  parts  and  the  design 
of  all. 


RELATED  PROPHETIC  SECTIONS         71 

2.  Any  man  who  looks  carefully  at  this  group  and 
finds  its  culmination  in  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  a  ruler  of 
a  fourth  fragment  of  the  third  world-empire,  either  is 
devoid  of  common  sense  and  should  receive  the  charity 
accorded  to  those  unfortunates  afflicted  with  mental 
aberration,  or  is  so  blinded  with  prejudice  he  cannot  see. 
In  the  case  of  the  latter  alternative  this  much  of  Paul's 
words  apply:  "If  our  gospel  be  hid,  it  is  hid  to  them 
whom  the  god  of  this  world  has  blinded  lest  they  should 
see,"  or  our  Lord's  words,  "Having  eyes  they  see  not." 
An  unbiased  child  can  see  that  the  culmination  of  the 
book  as  to  a  person  is  in  the  King  of  the  fifth  world- 
empire,  and  the  culmination  as  to  a  fact  is  in  the  Mes- 
siah's final  advent  for  resurrection  and  judgment. 

3.  Following  the  characteristic  Bible-method  and  plan, 
secular  governments  in  this  book  are  considered  only  as 
they  relate  to  the  supremacy  of  the  divine  government 
and  to  the  kingdom  of  God.  All  the  rest  concerning 
them  is  left  in  silence. 

4.  The  relation  between  the  parts  of  the  prophecy  is 
manifest  throughout.  The  first  prophecy  is  the  basis  of 
all  the  following  sections.  They  only  elaborate  some  de- 
tail concerning  one  or  the  other  of  the  five  world-empires 
set  forth  in  the  first  dream  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  the  four- 
pointed  image  and  the  conquering  stone.  For  example, 
the  first  prophecy  tells  in  general  terms  of  four  successive 
world-empires  to  be  followed  by  a  fifth  and  spiritual 
world-empire.  The  second  and  third  sections  of  prophecy 
elaborate  some  details  of  the  first  great  secular  mon- 
archy, telling  us  what  befell  its  first  and  last  king  and 
the  transition  to  the  second  monarchy.  The  fourth 
prophecy  presents  under  different  imagery  the  same  five 
world-empires,  but  gives  some  detail  of  every  one  not 
stated  in  the  general  terms  of  the  first  prophecy. 


72  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

The  fifth  prophecy  confines  itself  to  details  not  before 
given  of  the  second  and  third  monarchies,  how  sov- 
ereignty passes  from  one  to  the  other,  how  the  third  is 
dismembered,  to  prepare  the  way  for  the  fourth,  and  how 
both  are  related  to  the  kingdom  of  God. 

The  sixth  prophecy  speaks  only  of  the  King  of  the  fifth 
monarchy  in  His  humiliation  and  sacrifice,  as  the  third 
had  spoken  of  His  glory  and  exaltation,  and  the  seventh  is 
the  vision  of  the  Son  of  Man. 

The  eighth  deals  only  at  first  with  the  strifes  between 
two  of  the  parts  of  the  dismembered  third  monarchy,  in- 
cidentally alluding  to  the  coming  power  of  the  fourth 
monarchy,  glides,  by  easy  transition,  from  the  first  anti- 
christ, Antiochus,  to  a  second  anti-christ  in  the  far  distant 
future,  an  anti-christ  already  foreshown  in  the  little  horn 
of  the  fourth  beast,  and  concludes  with  the  final  advent 
of  the  King  of  the  fifth  monarchy.  No  other  book  in  all 
literature,  sacred  or  profane,  more  clearly  evidences 
greater  unity,  one  consistent  plan,  more  order  in  treat- 
ment, or  a  more  glorious  climax. 

Of  very  great  interest  to  us  and  to  all  who  love  God  and 
His  cause  is  the  development  of  the  Messianic  thought  as 
the  hope  of  the  world.  It  concerns  us  much  to  fix  in  our 
minds  this  development. 

The  first  prophecy  tells  of  the  divine  origin  and  ulti- 
mate prevalence  of  Messiah's  kingdom. 

The  sixth  tells  of  Messiah's  first  advent  in  His  humili- 
ation and  sacrifice. 

The  fourth  tells  of  His  exaltation  and  enthronement 
after  the  humiliation. 

The  eighth  tells  of  His  final  advent  for  resurrection  and 
judgment. 

And  so  we  need  to  note  the  coming  of  the  first  anti- 
christ, Antiochus,  in  the  little  horn  of  the  third  beast 


RELATED  PROPHETIC  SECTIONS         TS 

(Dan.  8:9)  and  the  second  anti-christ  in  the  Httle  horn 
of  the  fourth  beast  (Dan.  7 :  8)  identical  with  John's  anti- 
christ, (Rev.  13:1-8)  with  its  papal  head  (Rev. 
13:  11-18).  And  so  we  find  reference  to  the  third  anti- 
christ in  II :  36-39  who  is  not  the  same  as  Paul's  Man  of 
Sin  (II  Thes.  2:8  and  Rev.  20:  11),  but  this  third  anti- 
christ comes  at  the  beginning  of  the  millennium  and 
wages  a  conflict  against  the  Jews,  at  which  time  they 
will  be  converted  and  the  millennium  will  be  ushered  in. 
Daniel  does  not  see  Paul's  Man  of  Sin. 

How  clearly  and  with  what  precious  comfort  do  all 
these  prophecies  reveal  the  supreme  government  of  God 
over  nations  and  men,  the  universal  sweep  of  His  provi- 
dence, both  general  and  special ! 

5.  Finally  how  well  we  can  understand,  in  the  light 
of  these  great  prophecies,  the  influence  of  the  man  and 
his  book  on  all  subsequent  ages.  His  apocalyptic  style 
and  symbolism  reappear  in  Zechariah's  visions,  and 
form  the  greater  part  of  the  basis  of  John's  New  Testa- 
ment Apocalypse. 

His  Son  of  Man  creates  a  Messianic  title  which  our 
Lord  adopts.  His  unique  prophecy  of  the  exact  time  of 
Messiah's  first  advent  creates  a  preparation  in  the  hearts 
of  the  pious  to  expect  Him  just  then.  We  could  not 
understand  old  Simeon  at  all  if  Daniel  hadn't  fixed  the 
time.  Other  prophets  had  foretold  His  lineage,  the  place 
of  His  birth.  His  great  expiation  and  consequent  en- 
thronement, but  no  other  showed  just  when  He  would 
come.  His  stress  on  "the  kingdom  of  God  and  its  cer- 
tain coming  and  prevalence"  put  the  titles  of  this  divine 
government  in  the  mouths  of  John  the  Baptist,  Matthew, 
Mark,  Luke,  John  and  Paul.  His  sublime  character  as 
evidenced  in  his  temperance,  wisdom,  incorruptible  integ- 
rity, audacity  of  faith,  indomitable  courage,  and  inflexible 


74  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

devotion  to  God,  has  fired  the  hearts  of  a  thousand  orators 
and  created  a  million  heroes.  His  words  have  become 
the  themes  of  a  thousand  pulpits.  His  righteous  admin- 
istration of  public  affairs  has  created  a  thousand  reform- 
ers in  politics  and  supplied  the  hope  of  all  subsequent 
civic  righteousness.  "Dare  to  be  a  Daniel"  has  become 
the  slogan  of  the  ages. 

His  distinction  between  duty  to  the  human  government 
and  duty  to  the  divine  government  prepared  the  way  for 
the  reception  of  our  Lord's  great  dictum,  "Render  unto 
Caesar  the  things  that  are  Caesar's  and  unto  God  the 
things  that  are  God's."  He  laid  the  foundation  of  the 
doctrine  that  the  state  cannot  intrude  into  the  realm  of 
conscience,  and  so  was  the  pioneer,  piloting  a  burdened 
world  to  its  present  great  heritage  of  religious  liberty. 
This  man  was  not  a  reed  shaken  by  the  wind.  He  was 
no  Reuben,  unstable  as  was  water.  We  can't  even  think 
about  him  without  wanting  to  sing: 

"How  firm  a  foundation,  ye  saints  of  the  Lord, 
Is  laid  for  your  faith  in  His  excellent  word." 

"Born  in  the  reign  of  good  Josiah,  thy  childhood  re- 
membering the  finding  of  the  lost  book  of  Moses,  thy 
youth  passed  in  the  great  reformation  and  thy  heart 
warmed  in  the  mighty  revival  that  followed,  student  of 
Jeremiah,  prime  minister  of  two  world-empires  and  be- 
loved of  God — thou  art  a  granite  mountain,  O  Daniel, 
higher  than  Chimborazo,  Mount  Blanc  or  Dwa  Walla 
Giri !  Snarling  little  critics,  like  coyotes,  may  grabble 
their  holes  in  the  foot-hills  that  lean  for  support  against 
thy  solidity,  but  their  yelping  can  never  disturb  thy  calm 
serenity  nor  the  dust  they  paw  up  can  ever  dim  the 
eternal  sunshine  of  the  smiles  of  God  that  halo  thy  sum- 
mit." 


RELATED  PROPHETIC  SECTIONS         75 

Having  now  considered  these  eight  prophetic  sections 
in  group,  let  us  give  attention  to  their  exposition  in 
severalty. 

Nebuchadnezzar's  First  Dream 

God's  sovereignty  extends  to  men  asleep  as  vi^ell  as  to 
men  awake.  Often  His  Spirit  has  made  revelation 
through  dreams.  Dreams  of  indigestion  are  chaotic, 
without  form,  plan  or  coherence.  But  dreams  sent  by 
the  Spirit  awaken  after-thought,  appeal  to  the  intelligence 
and  vividly  impress  the  dreamer.  So  Jacob's  dream  at 
Bethel  of  the  ladder  reaching  from  earth  to  heaven,  on 
which  the  angels  of  God  ascended  and  descended,  or 
Pharaoh's  dreams  interpreted  by  Joseph,  and  the  dreams 
of  Nebuchadnezzar.  No  human  system  of  psychology 
has  ever  explained  the  subtle  and  direct  impact  of  Spirit 
on  spirit.  It  is  quite  possible  that  there  may  have  been 
some  connection  between  Nebuchadnezzar's  waking 
thoughts  and  the  dream  which  follows.  We  can  at  least 
conceive  of  previous  reflections  on  his  part  full  of  ques- 
tionings to  which  this  dream  would  be  a  pertinent  answer. 
He  may  well  have  meditated  upon  the  world-wide  empire 
he  had  established  and  wondered  if  it  would  last,  and  if 
not  what  other  government  would  succeed,  and  would  it 
last.  He  may  have  pondered  the  causes  of  stability  in 
human  government,  or  the  elements  of  decay  and  dis- 
integration, and  have  wondered  if  human  history  would 
always  be  a  record  of  the  successive  rising  and  falling 
of  nations,  or  would  the  time  ever  come  when  the  earth 
would  know  a  universal  and  everlasting  kingdom,  and 
if  so,  who  would  be  its  author  and  what  the  principles  of 
its  perpetuity.  Nebuchadnezzar  was  a  truly  great  man, 
a  thinker  and  organizer,  and  he  was  a  pious  man  accord- 
ing to  the  requirements  of  his  religion.    So  he  may  have 


76  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

been  the  waking  subject  of  thoughts  and  questionings  to 
which  God  sends  an  answer  in  a  dream  by  night.  Any- 
how, he  had  the  dream,  and  this  was  the  dream :  He  saw 
a  great  and  terrible  image,  a  silent  and  luminous  colossus 
in  human  form,  standing  upon  the  level  Babylonian  plain. 
Its  several  parts  were  strangely  incongruous.  The  head 
was  gold,  the  chest  and  arms  were  silver,  the  lower  body 
and  thighs  were  brass,  the  legs  were  iron,  ending  in  feet 
with  ten  toes  whose  iron  was  mingled  with  clay. 

Did  this  image  reveal  the  highest  attainment  of  human 
government  and  prophesy  its  inevitable  deterioration 
from  gold  to  silver,  from  silver  to  brass,  from  brass  to 
iron,  from  iron  to  crumbling  clay?  Or  did  it  suggest  a 
succession  of  governments,  the  first  with  the  greatest 
unity  and  the  greatest  excellency,  one  head  and  that  gold  ? 
The  second  dual  in  composition  with  its  two  arms,  the 
third  commencing  one,  but  dividing  into  two  thighs,  the 
fourth  standing  dual  in  two  legs  but  dividing  into  ten 
toes?  And  while  he  considered  it  he  saw  a  little  stone 
cut  out  of  a  mountain  without  human  hands,  falling  to 
the  plain  and  intelligently  rolling  toward  the  image,  and 
rolling  gathering  bulk  and  momentum  until  it  smites  the 
image  on  its  feet  of  mixed  iron  and  clay,  overthrows  it, 
crushes  it,  pulverizes  it,  and  rolling  on  in  resistless  power, 
ever  growing  as  it  rolls,  until  it  becomes  a  mountain  in 
bulk  and  fills  the  whole  earth.    Such  the  dream. 

The  Interpretation  of  the  Dream 

The  dream  foretells  five  great  world-empires: 
The  first  is  identified  as  the  Babylonian. 
The  second  is  identified  in  the  prophecy  as  the  Medo- 
Persian. 
The  third  is  identified  in  the  prophecy  as  the  Grecian. 


RELATED  PROPHETIC  SECTIONS         7T 

The  fourth  by  a  suggestion  in  the  eighth  prophecy  as 
the  Roman. 

The  fifth  is  the  kingdom  of  God  set  up  by  the  God  of 
heaven  and  without  hands  in  the  days  of  the  fourth 
empire. 

Characteristics  of  These  Empires 

This  is  the  characteristic  of  the  first:  "Thou,  O  king, 
art  king  of  kings  unto  whom  the  God  of  heaven  hath 
given  the  kingdom,  the  power,  and  the  strength  and  the 
glory,  and  wheresoever  the  children  of  men  dwell,  the 
beasts  of  the  field  and  the  birds  of  the  heaven  hath  He 
given  into  thine  hands  and  hath  made  thee  to  rule  over 
them  all,  and  thou  art  that  head  of  gold." 

The  characteristic  of  the  second  one  is,  so  far  as  this 
chapter  tells  us,  that  it  is  inferior  to  the  first.  This  chap- 
ter, in  identifying  the  second  world  monarchy,  simply 
tells  us  that  it  succeeds  the  Babylonian,  the  first,  but  in 
the  later  prophetic  sections  when  this  vision  is  elaborated 
it  is  expressly  said  to  be  a  kingdom  of  the  Medes  and  of 
the  Persians.  I  say  that  the  book  of  Daniel  identifies 
the  second  world  government  as  the  Medo-Persian  empire 
just  as  plainly  and  explicitly  and  exactly  as  it  identifies 
the  first  with  the  Babylonian. 

Now  when  we  come  to  the  third,  "another  third  king- 
dom of  brass  which  shall  bear  rule  over  all  the  earth," 
is  all  this  chapter  says  about  this  one,  but  when  we  take 
up  the  subsequent  prophetic  section  it  is  explicitly  said 
to  be  the  Grecian  Empire,  the  thighs  indicating  subse- 
quent division  of  the  empire.  One  man  said  to  me,  "If 
the  third  empire  is  unquestionably  the  Greek  Empire, 
how  can  it  be  represented  as  the  lower  body  and  two 
thighs  divided  into  four  parts  ?"  My  answer  is  that  this 
book  tells  us  that  it  did  divide  into  four  parts,  but  deals 


78  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

only  with  the  two  parts  which  touched  God's  people. 
This  book  has  nothing  in  detail  to  say  about  the  divisions 
of  Alexander's  empire  beyond  the  Seleucids  and  the 
Ptolemies,  one  of  them  getting  Syria  and  the  other  getting 
Egypt. 

When  he  comes  to  speak  of  the  fourth  this  is  what  he 
says:  "And  the  fourth  kingdom  shall  be  strong  as  iron 
forasmuch  as  iron  breaketh  in  pieces  and  subdueth  all 
things,  and  as  iron  that  crusheth,  all  these  shall  it  break 
in  pieces  and  crush.  Whereas,  thou  sawest  the  feet  and 
the  toes,  a  part  of  potter's  clay  and  part  of  iron,  it  shall 
be  a  divided  kingdom.  But  there  shall  be  in  it  of  the 
strength  of  the  iron  forasmuch  as  thou  sawest  iron  mixed 
with  the  miry  clay,  and  as  the  toes  of  the  feet  were  partly 
of  iron  and  partly  of  clay,  so  shall  the  kingdom  be  partly 
strong  and  partly  broken ;  and  whereas,  thou  sawest  the 
iron  mingled  with  miry  clay,  they  shall  mingle  themselves 
with  the  seed  of  men,  but  they  shall  not  cleave  one  to 
another  even  as  iron  does  not  mingle  with  clay." 

This  book  in  this  chapter  does  not  name  that  fourth 
government,  but  when  we  come  to  consider  the  visions 
of  the  four  beasts  which  is  the  same  as  this  vision  in 
another  form,  but  with  other  details,  we  get  a  still 
clearer  idea  of  the  characteristics  of  this  government; 
and  when  we  come  to  chapter  ii,  when  we  are  consider- 
ing the  last  prophetic  revelation,  we  have  a  suggestion 
where  this  fourth  government  comes  in  and  holds  Anti- 
ochus  Epiphanes  at  bay,  that  place  where  the  representa- 
tive of  Rome  made  a  little  circle  in  the  sand  around 
Antiochus  and  said,  "You  must  answer  before  you  step 
outside  of  that  circle."  We  know  it  also  to  be  Rome 
because  Rome  with  two  legs  divided  into  the  Eastern  and 
Western  Empires,  Constantine  establishing  Eastern  Rome 
at  Byzantium  on  the  Bosporus  while  the  Western  Empire 


RELATED  PROPHETIC  SECTIONS         79 

continues  at  Rome.  We  also  know  it  by  its  divisions  into 
ten  kingdoms  as  its  imperial  supremacy  passed  away. 
Here  is  what  he  says  about  the  last  kingdom : 
(i)  He  gives  its  origin:  "I  saw  a  little  stone  cut  out 
without  hands."  Those  other  four  stood  in  the  form  of 
a  man  because  man  was  the  author  of  them  all.  This 
fifth  one  is  divine,  this  fifth  kingdom  is  set  up  by  the 
God  of  heaven,  and  we  should  never  lose  sight  of  that 
fact. 

(2)  The  second  thought  that  he  presents  is  as  to  the 
time  when  the  God  of  heaven  would  set  up  this  king- 
dom; that  it  would  be  in  the  days  of  the  fourth  mon- 
archy— the  Roman  monarchy:  "In  the  days  of  these 
kings  will  the  God  of  heaven  set  up  a  kingdom."  So 
when  a  man  asks  when  was  the  kingdom  of  heaven  set 
up,  and  that,  of  course,  means  in  its  visible  form,  as  the 
Babylonian  kingdom  was  visible,  the  Medo-Persian  king- 
dom was  visible,  the  Greek  kingdom  was  visible,  the 
Roman  kingdom  was  visible,  and  as  God  all  the  time  had 
a  spiritual  kingdom,  but  now  He  is  to  set  up  a  visible 
kingdom  and  it  is  to  be  just  as  visible  as  any  of  these 
others — then,  as  a  Baptist,  I  answer:  Jesus  set  up  the 
Kingdom  in  His  lifetime,  as  the  Gospels  abundantly  show. 

(3)  The  third  thought  in  this  description  of  this  king- 
dom is  its  beginning,  its  gradual  progress,  its  prevalence 
over  the  whole  earth,  just  a  pebble  falling,  and  as  it  falls 
getting  bigger,  rolling,  and  as  it  rolls  getting  bigger, 
smiting  these  other  governments,  becoming  a  mountain, 
becoming  as  big  as  the  world.  And  when  we  get  to 
thinking  about  that  progress  of  this  kingdom,  we  should 
remember  what  our  Lord  said,  that  in  its  internal  work- 
ing it  is  like  leaven  which  a  woman  puts  in  three  meas- 
ures of  meal  and  ultimately  it  leavens  the  whole  lump; 
and  when  we  think  about  its  external  development,  it  is 


80  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

like  a  grain  of  mustard  seed  which  a  man  planted  and 
it  grew  and  grew  and  grew  until  it  became  a  tree. 

Whenever  we  hear  a  pessimist  preaching  an  idea  of  a 
kingdom  like  a  tadpole,  that  commences  big  at  first  and 
tapers  to  a  very  fine  tail,  getting  smaller  and  smaller  and 
zvorse  and  worse,  then  that  is  not  the  kingdom  Daniel 
spoke  of. 

His  kingdom  commences  small  and  gets  bigger  and 
bigger,  and  mightier  and  mightier,  and  I  thank  God  that 
I  don't  have  to  preach  concerning  a  kingdom  that  is  con- 
tinually "petering  out."  I  am  glad  that  I  can  preach  a 
gospel  that  is  growing  in  power  and  extending  in  domain 
and  that  has  the  promise  of  God  that  it  shall  fill  the 
whole  world  and  be  everlasting.  It  always  did  give  me 
the  creeps  to  hear  one  of  those  pessimists.  They  get 
their  ideas  from  an  inexcusable  misinterpretation  of  cer- 
tain scriptures. 

I  heard  one  of  them  say,  "Don't  our  Lord  say  in  answer 
to  the  direct  question,  'Are  there  few  that  will  be  saved  ?' 
that  straight  is  the  gate  and  narrow  is  the  way  and  few 
there  be  that  find  it?"  I  said,  "Yes,  but  to  whom  did  He 
say  that?"  To  the  Jews  of  His  day,  and  then  to  prevent 
a  misconstruction,  while  only  a  few  Jews  of  His  day 
would  be  saved.  He  says,  "But  I  say  unto  you  that  many 
shall  come  from  the  east  and  the  west  and  the  north  and 
the  south  and  shall  recline  at  the  table  with  Abraham  and 
Isaac  and  Jacob."  The  thought  reappears  in  Revelation 
where  John  sees  the  host  of  the  redeemed.  He  introduces 
us  first  to  144,000  Jews  and  then  he  shows  us  a  line  that 
no  man  can  see  the  end  of :  "I  saw  a  great  multitude  that 
no  man  could  number  out  of  every  nation  and  tribe  and 
tongue  and  kindred."  So  if  the  kingdom  which  Jesus 
Christ  in  the  days  of  His  flesh  set  up  on  this  earth  is 
narrowing,  that  is  cause  for  sadness,  but  if  it  is  spreading 


RELATED  PROPHETIC  SECTIONS         81 

out,  growing  bigger  and  bigger,  and  has  perpetuity,  that 
is  a  cause  for  gladness. 

This  visible  kingdom  of  Jesus  Christ  will  be  perpetual. 
Perpetuity  is  its  heritage. 

We  need  not  be  afraid  to  preach  its  perpetuity  and  its 
visibility,  with  visible  subjects,  xmth  visible  ordinances, 
with  a  znsible  church  charged  with  its  administration. 
It  will  not  be  sponged  off  the  board,  any  of  it,  neither  the 
kingdom  nor  its  gospel  nor  its  church  nor  its  ordinances. 
They  will  stand  until  the  rivers  shall  be  emptied  into 
the  sea.  As  Dr.  Burleson  used  to  say:  "It  will  be  stand- 
ing when  grass  quits  growing,  and  we  should  not  be 
afraid  to  preach  perpetuity."  Let  us  not  be  too  sure  that 
we  can  take  a  surveying  chain  and  trace  that  perpetuity 
through  human  agencies  and  human  history,  but  we  may 
certainly  stand  on  the  declaration  of  God's  word  that  this 
kingdom  is  everlasting:  "Forasmuch  as  thou  sawest  that 
a  stone  was  cut  out  of  the  mountain  without  hands,  and 
that  in  the  days  of  those  kings  shall  the  God  of  heaven 
set  up  a  kingdom  which  shall  never  be  destroyed,  nor 
shall  the  sovereignty  thereof  be  left  to  another  people, 
but  it  shall  break  in  pieces  and  consume  all  these  king- 
doms, and  it  shall  stand  forever." 

Over  and  over  again  in  this  book,  Daniel  holds  out,  as 
he  explains  the  thought  of  this  first  dream  as  a  light  that 
gets  bigger  and  bigger  and  brighter  and  brighter,  that 
the  saints  shall  possess  the  kingdoms  of  the  world. 

/  expect  to  see  (in  the  flesh  or  out  of  the  flesh — it  mat- 
ters not — )  every  mountain  of  this  earth  ormountain  range 
and  every  valley  between  and  every  plain,  whether  rich 
red  land  like  the  Panhandle  or  dry  sand  like  the  Sahara 
Desert;  and  every  zone,  Arctic,  Temperate  or  Torrid; 
every  iceberg  shivering  in  the  Aurora  Borealis  around  the 
North  Pole  or  South  Pole,  have  floating  over  it  the  great 


82  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

zi'hite  conquering  banner  of  the  Gospel  of  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ. 

We  are  to  have  every  hit  of  it,  and  the  time  will  come 
when  no  fallen  angel  will  flap  his  zmng  and  make  a 
shadow  on  any  part  of  it  and  when  no  zcicked  man  shall 
crush  beneath  his  feet  any  of  its  beautiful  or  sweet  flow- 
ers, but  when  the  meek  shall  inherit  the  earth,  and  through- 
out the  whole  earth,  after  its  regeneration,  there  shall 
dwell  eternal  righteousness. 

QUESTIONS 

1.  Give,  in  order,  the  prophetic  sections  of  the  book  of  Daniel. 

2.  Show  the  unity  of  the  book  from  these  sections. 

3.  Show  the  culmination  of  the  book  in  person  and  fact. 

4.  In  what  respect  only  are   secular  governments   considered 
in  this  book  and  throughout  the  Bible? 

5.  Show  the  relations  of  the  prophetic  sections  to  each  other 
and  how  all  the  rest  are  developments  of  the  first. 

6.  Give,    in    order,    all    the    developments    of    the    Messianic 
thought. 

7.  Give  the  several  anti-christs,  citing  passages  for  each. 

8.  What  great  doctrine  of  special  comfort  do  all  these  prophe- 
cies show? 

9.  Give  particulars  to  show  the  influence  of  the  man  and  the 
book  on  later  ages. 

10.  Name  the  five  world-empires  of  Daniel  2. 

11.  What  the  characteristics  of  the  fifth,  who  its  author  and 
when  set  up? 


VII 

THE  PROPHETIC  SECTIONS  OF  DANIEL 

(Continued) 

Scriptures:  Dan.  7:1-28 

IN  the  preceding  chapter  were  named,  in  order,  all 
the  prophetic  sections  in  this  book,  and  it  was  shown 
that  the  seven  later  sections  were  but  developments 
of  the  first.  In  that  first  section  (Dan.  2:31-45),  we 
found  foreshown  the  rise,  in  succession,  of  five  empires — 
four  human,  one  divine — all  visible,  all  universal,  and 
the  last  everlasting.  We  found  the  four  human  empires 
to  be  the  Babylonian,  Medo-Persian,  Grecian,  and  Roman, 
and  the  Divine  Empire  to  be  the  everlasting  kingdom  set 
up  by  our  Lord  in  His  lifetime. 

Attention  has  already  been  called  to  the  contention  of 
the  radical  critics  that,  in  the  mind  of  the  author,  the 
kingdom  of  the  Medes  was  conceived  of  as  distinct  from, 
and  prior  to,  the  kingdom  of  the  Persians,  and  therefore 
from  the  author's  viewpoint,  the  four  human  empires,  in 
succession,  were  the  Babylonian,  the  Median,  the  Persian, 
the  Grecian;  or  as  others  of  them  contended,  the  four 
empires  were  Assyrian,  Babylonian,  Medo-Persian,  and 
Grecian. 

It  has  already  been  shown  that  the  first  of  these  con- 
tentions is  every  way  untenable,  being  flatly  contradicted 
by  the  whole  tenor  of  the  book,  and  that  the  latter  is 

83 


84  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

expressly  contradicted  by  the  declaration  that  the  Baby- 
lonian is  the  first  of  series  (2:38). 

That  the  mind  may  be  fortified  against  the  assertion 
that  the  author  regarded  the  Medes  and  Persians  as 
distinct,  constituting  two  of  the  four  kingdoms,  an  asser- 
tion in  order  to  make  the  Grecian  the  last,  and  then  by 
dating  the  book  after  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  destroy  its 
predictive  character,  the  argument  is  here  restated : 

1.  The  book  declares  that  the  empire  succeeding  the 
Babylonian  was  that  of  the  Medes  and  Persians  (5:28), 
and  not  the  Medes  alone. 

2.  Their  laws  are  the  laws  of  one  government  (6:8, 
12,  15). 

3.  The  dual  nature  of  the  constituent  parts  of  the  one 
government  is  set  forth  in  all  the  symbols,  namely  (a)  the 
chest  and  arms  of  silver  (2:32)  ;  (b)  the  lop-sided  bear, 
one  side  higher  than  the  other  (7:5)  ;  (c)  the  two-horned 
ram,  one  horn  higher  than  the  other  (8:3).  To  clinch 
matters  this  one  ram  represents  a  single  government 
whose  two  horns  are  expressly  interpreted  to  be  the  kings 
of  Media  and  Persia  (8:20). 

4.  The  he-goat  is  the  Grecian,  or  third  empire  (8:21). 

5.  Antiochus  Epiphanes  is  the  little  horn  of  the  Gre- 
cian Empire  (8:9-12,  23-25),  who  is  the  first  anti-christ. 

6.  But  after  this  cometh  a  fourth  beast,  or  govern- 
ment, with  ten  horns,  and  later  a  little  horn,  which  is  the 
second  anti-christ  {']:y,  8,  and  Rev.  13:  1-8).  The  ruler 
of  this  changed  beast-government  is  the  pope  (Rev. 
13:11). 

All  these  critics  make  Antiochus  the  little  horn  of  this 
Greek  Government  in  chapter  eight,  but  cannot  dispose 
of  another  little  horn  on  the  fourth  beast. 

It  is  impossible  to  make  the  fourth  beast  (chap.  7)  with 


RELATED  PROPHETIC  SECTIONS         85 

its  ten  horns  and  later  a  little  horn  plucking  up  three  of 
the  ten  horns,  the  same  as  the  he-goat  (chap.  8),  with 
first  one  horn,  then  four,  then  a  little  horn.  Only  one 
blinded  by  a  presupposition  would  attempt  it. 

We  have  found  the  little  stone  of  the  second  chapter 
to  be  the  kingdom  of  God,  with  these  characteristics: 

1.  It  is  a  visible  kingdom,  like  the  others. 

2.  It  is  to  be  set  up  by  the  God  of  heaven,  not  man. 

3.  It  is  to  be  set  up  in  the  days  of  the  fourth  human 
empire. 

4.  It  is  to  be  progressive,  growing  larger  and  larger. 
It  will  not  be  like  a  tadpole,  big  at  the  head  and  tapering 
into  a  small  tail,  but  like  a  river,  small  at  its  fountain  but 
a  sea  at  the  last. 

5.  It  will  overturn  all  human  governments. 

6.  It  will  be  universal — fill  the  whole  earth. 

We  have  seen  that  Daniel's  kingdom  of  God  and  the 
time  of  its  appearing  furnished  the  title  of  the  new  gov- 
ernment to  John  the  Baptist,  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  John 
and  Paul,  and  prepared  men  to  look  for  it  just  when  it 
came,  and  the  king's  title,  "Son  of  Man"  (Dan.  7:13) 
was  adopted  by  our  Lord. 

Both  of  the  next  two  prophetic  sections  (4 :  20-33  '■> 
5:25-28)  have  been  considered  in  the  discussion  of  the 
historical  sections  and  are  but  elaborations  of  the  first 
world-empire  of  chapter  2,  merely  showing  what  befell 
the  first  and  last  of  its  kings  and  marking  the  transition 
to  the  second  world-empire.  We  need  to  note  here  but  a 
few  things  additional  concerning  them.  The  prophecy 
in  4 :  14-17,  and  as  interpreted  in  4 :  24-26,  is  very  remark- 
able. None  but  God  could  have  foreshown  the  coming  of 
such  a  disease  upon  the  king  of  Babylon,  and  his  restora- 
tion to  both  mind  and  kingdom  after  seven  years.  The 
fulfillment  came  in  twelve  months  after  his  recovery. 


86  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

The  prophecy  of  the  handwriting  on  the  wall  (5:25-28) 
was  fulfilled  that  very  night. 

So  we  pass  on  to  the  fourth  prophecy,  chapter  7.  The 
date  of  the  prophecy  is  clear,  the  first  year  of  Belshaz- 
zar.  The  correspondence  of  this  prophecy  with  the  first 
in  chapter  2  is  very  remarkable,  while  additional  details 
are  very  striking.  The  prophet  beholds  a  sea,  the  Med- 
iterranean, which  symbolizes  the  nations  here  as  in 
Psalms  65 : 7  and  in  the  Revelation  of  John.  The  four 
winds  which  break  out  on  this  sea  signify  the  angelic 
ministration  in  the  development  of  nations.  No  nation 
arises  by  chance. 

This  brings  us  to  the  consideration  of  Daniel's  doctrine 
of  the  angels  as  related  to  the  nations.  The  Septuagint 
version  renders  Deut.  32 : 8  thus :  "He  set  the  nations 
according  to  the  angels  of  God."  We  will  see  later  in 
the  book  that  while  Michael,  the  archangel,  is  the  angel 
of  the  elect  nation,  other  angels  seem  to  have  charge  of 
other  nations.  We  see  in  Rev.  13:  i  how  Satan  stood  at 
the  sea  and  called  up  the  beast-nation  of  that  chapter, 
corresponding  to  the  fourth  beast  of  this  chapter.  And 
as  Satan  is  the  usurping  prince  of  this  world,  we  may 
understand  how  his  angels  may  be  charged  with  the 
development  and  guidance  of  evil  nations,  always,  how- 
ever, subject  to  the  limitations  of  God's  paramount  and 
supreme  government.  This  will  enable  us  to  understand 
a  later  passage  (Dan.  10:13),  wherein  the  Angel  or 
Prince  of  Persia  hindered  the  favorable  purposes  of  the 
Son  of  God  toward  the  Jews  and  how  Michael,  the  angel 
of  the  elect  nation,  came  to  aid  their  cause.  The  min- 
istry of  angels,  both  good  and  bad,  and  their  special 
interest  in  national  movements  appear  abundantly  in  the 
Old  Testament  books  which  precede  Daniel  and  reappear 
in  New  Testament  books.     We  see  how  one  tempted 


RELATED  PROPHETIC  SECTIONS         87 

David  to  number  Israel  and  another  is  permitted  to 
deceive  Ahab.  In  the  Psalms  it  is  said,  "He  maketh  his 
angels  winds." 

What  the  reader  should  note  particularly  is  that  gov- 
ernments neither  rise  nor  fall  of  themselves  alone.  The 
first  beast  or  government  to  arise  from  the  wind-whipped 
or  angel-disturbed  sea  is  thus  described:  "The  first  was 
like  a  lion,  and  had  eagle's  wings ;  I  beheld  till  the  wings 
thereof  were  plucked,  and  it  was  lifted  up  from  the  earth, 
and  made  to  stand  upon  the  feet  as  a  man,  and  a  man's 
heart  was  given  to  it"  (7:4). 

This  winged  lion  is  like  the  golden  head  of  the  image 
in  chapter  2,  a  symbol  of  the  Babylonian  government,  or 
first  world-empire.  But  a  great  change  has  come  since 
the  days  of  Nebuchadnezzar.  The  lion  has  lost  his  wings. 
He  is  now  but  a  tame  beast  with  the  timid  heart  of  a 
man.  Aggressiveness  and  conquest  have  ceased.  The 
histories  and  monumental  inscriptions  show  the  ever- 
increasing  power  of  Persia  and  the  decadence  of  Babylon. 

The  second  beast  is  thus  described:  "And,  behold, 
another  beast,  a  second,  like  to  a  bear,  and  it  raised  up 
itself  on  one  side,  and  it  had  three  ribs  in  the  mouth  of 
it  between  the  teeth  of  it,  and  they  said  thus  unto  it, 
Arise,  devour  much  flesh"  (7:5). 

This,  like  the  silver  chest  and  arms  of  the  image  in 
chapter  2,  symbolizes  Medo-Persia,  one  side  higher  than 
the  other.  But  there  is  a  distinct  advance  in  the  thought. 
The  three  ribs  represent  the  great  governments  this  bear 
devoured,  which  were  Assyria,  Babylon,  and  Eg)'pt.  They 
were  the  great  governments  which  historically  touched 
Israel. 

The  third  beast  is  thus  described:  "After  this  I  beheld, 
and,  lo,  another,  like  a  leopard,  which  had  upon  the  back 
of  it  four  wings  of  a  fowl :  the  beast  had  also  four  heads; 


88  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

and  dominion  was  given  to  it."  This  leopard,  like  the 
brazen  body  and  thighs  of  the  image  in  chapter  2,  evi- 
dently refers  to  the  Grecian  kingdom,  whose  four  wings 
refer  to  the  rapidity  of  its  progress,  and  whose  four 
heads  refer  to  its  divisions  in  four  parts,  as  we  shall 
particularly  consider  in  the  next  prophetic  section. 

Evidently  the  interest  of  this  vision  centers  in  the 
fourth  beast  or  government,  and  in  the  crowning  of  the 
king  of  the  fifth  empire.  In  the  first  vision  (chapter  2) 
we  found  the  fourth  government  one  of  iron,  but  a  divi- 
sion later  into  ten  parts,  or  toes,  and  a  decadence  indi- 
cated by  the  commingled  clay.  Here  there  is  a  great 
advance  in  the  thought :  "After  this  I  saw  in  the  night 
visions,  and,  behold,  a  fourth  beast,  dreadful  and  terrible, 
and  strong  exceedingly ;  and  it  had  great  iron  teeth ; 
it  devoured  and  brake  in  pieces,  and  stamped  the  residue 
with  the  feet  of  it:  and  it  was  diverse  from  all  the 
beasts  that  were  before  it ;  and  it  had  ten  horns.  I  con- 
sidered the  horns,  and,  behold,  there  came  up  among  them 
another  little  horn  before  whom  there  were  three  of  the 
first  horns  plucked  up  by  the  roots  and,  behold,  in  this 
horn  were  eyes  like  the  eyes  of  a  man,  and  a  mouth 
speaking  great  things."  It  is  terrible  and  powerful.  The 
iron  appears  in  its  teeth.  The  divisions  are  no  longer 
toes,  but  ten  horns.  The  entirely  new  idea  is  a  little  horn 
which  plucks  up  three  of  the  ten  horns.  The  little  horn 
has  the  eyes  of  a  man  and  speaks  great  things. 

This  is  not  only  the  Rome  of  the  Caesars,  in  whose  days 
the  kingdom  of  God  was  set  up,  but  it  is  Rome  after  its 
destruction  as  a  political  power  and  its  division  into  the 
ten  European  governments  that  constituted  its  element 
before  its  disintegration.  It  is  not  only  that,  but  it  is  a 
Rome  diverse.  This  diversity  appears  in  its  latest  trans- 
formation when  the  little  horn  coming  up  that  plucks  up 


RELATED  PROPHETIC  SECTIONS         89 

three  of  the  ten  horns  or  kingdoms  and  having  the  eyes 
of  a  man,  speaks  great  sweUings  things.  The  nature  of 
the  diversity  better  appears  in  the  Revelation  of  John, 
where  the  same  beast  is  under  consideration :  "And  Satan 
stood  upon  the  sand  of  the  sea  and  I  saw  a  beast  coming 
up  out  of  the  sea  having  ten  horns  and  seven  heads  and 
on  his  horns  ten  diadems  and  on  his  heads  names  of  blas- 
phemy, and  the  beast  which  I  saw  was  like  unto  a  leopard 
and  his  feet  were  as  the  feet  of  a  bear  and  his  mouth  as 
the  mouth  of  a  lion,  and  the  dragon  gave  him  his  power 
and  his  throne  and  his  great  authority,  and  I  saw  one  of 
his  heads  as  though  it  had  been  smitten  unto  death,  but 
his  death  stroke  was  healed  and  the  whole  earth  won- 
dered after  the  beast  and  they  worshipped  the  dragon 
(Satan)  because  he  gave  his  authority  unto  the  beast,  and 
they  worshipped  the  beast,  saying.  Who  is  like  unto  the 
beast?  Who  is  able  to  war  with  him?  And  there  was 
given  to  him  a  mouth  speaking  great  things  and  blasphe- 
mies and  there  was  given  to  him  authority  to  continue 
forty-two  months,  and  he  opened  his  mouth  for  blas- 
phemies against  God  to  blaspheme  His  name  and  His 
tabernacle,  even  them  that  were  in  the  heavens,  and  it 
was  given  unto  him  to  make  war  with  the  saints  and  to 
overcome  them  and  there  was  given  unto  him  authority 
over  every  people,  tribe,  tongue  and  nation  and  all  that 
were  upon  the  earth  shall  worship  him,  everyone  whose 
name  hath  not  been  written  from  the  foundation  of  the 
world  in  the  book  of  the  Lamb  that  hath  been  slain. 
Every  man  that  hath  ears  to  hear  let  him  hear."  And 
then  he  goes  on  to  say,  "I  saw  another  beast  with  two 
horns  like  a  ram,  but  speaking  like  a  dragon,"  and  he 
takes  charge  of  this  other  beast.  It  is  perfectly  evident 
that  the  diversity  which  is  here  spoken  of  is  the  change 
in  the  nature  of  the  government.     We  have  first  the 


90  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

Rome  of  the  Cssars,  not  diverse  in  political  nature  from 
the  three  preceding  world-empires — then  the  downfall  of 
this  mere  political  government,  then  a  religio-political 
Roman  empire,  a  union  of  church  and  state,  with  the 
church  on  top,  then  in  the  lamb  who  speaks  like  a  dragon, 
the  papacy  which  rules  this  diverse  government.  Kings 
of  political  governments  came  to  put  their  necks  under 
the  heel  of  the  pope  that  sat  at  the  head  of  this  holy 
Roman  empire,  for  example,  Henry  of  Germany.  It  was 
to  this  former  custom  Bismarck  referred  when  he  said 
that  his  king  of  Germany  would  never  come  to  Conossa. 

In  the  book  of  Revelation,  which  is  largely  an  elabora- 
tion of  Daniel,  we  find  that  this  remarkable  development 
of  the  fourth  beast  is  still  at  Rome.  It  still  has  some- 
what universal  dominion  over  men,  but  it  is  a  religio- 
political  government.  It  claims  to  get  the  two  swords, 
secular  and  spiritual,  and  the  two  keys,  the  key  of  this 
world  and  the  key  to  the  world  to  come.  No  wonder 
that  beast  was  dreadful  and  powerful,  and  particularly 
diverse.  We  see  him  come  in  the  Caesars,  whose  legions 
conquered  the  world,  trampled  under  foot  everything  that 
opposed  it,  and  with  its  iron  teeth  crushed  the  bones  of 
its  enemies.  Then  in  the  book  of  Revelation  we  see 
political  Rome  cast  into  the  sea  like  a  burning  volcano, 
then  rises  up  a  new  Rome  with  the  death  stroke  of  the 
beast  healed,  with  a  new  head,  a  head  that  looks  like  a 
lamb  but  speaks  like  a  dragon.  There  is  the  little  horn 
of  this  Rome. 

We  now  come  to  what  this  chapter  has  to  say  about  the 
fifth  world-empire.  In  the  first  prophetic  section  we 
saw  the  kingdom  of  God  coming  in  the  days  of  the  Roman 
kings.  Now  a  new  thing  about  that  kingdom  of  God  is 
introduced,  an  entirely  new  thought:  "And  I  beheld  till 
thrones  were  placed  and  one  that  was  the  Ancient  of 


RELATED  PROPHETIC  SECTIONS         91 

Days  did  sit.  His  raiment  was  white  as  snow ;  the  hair 
of  his  head  Hke  pure  wool,  and  his  throne  was  hke  the 
fiery  flame  and  wheels  thereof  burning  fire.  A  fiery 
stream  issued  and  came  forth  from  before  him.  Thou- 
sands of  thousands  ministered  unto  him  and  ten  thousand 
times  ten  thousands  stood  before  him."  When  we  read 
that  and  read  the  vision  of  glory  in  Isaiah  6  and  Ezekiel 
I,  and  in  Revelation  4,  we  can't  mistake  the  import.  It 
is  the  throne  of  grace.  But  I  particularly  call  attention 
to  this:  "I  saw  in  the  night  visions  and  lo,  there  came 
with  the  clouds  of  heaven  one  like  unto  the  Son  of  Man, 
and  he  came  even  to  the  Ancient  of  Days  and  they 
brought  him  near  before  Him  and  there  was  given  unto 
Him  dominion  and  glory  and  a  kingdom  that  all  the 
peoples,  nations,  and  languages  under  heaven  should 
serve  Him.  His  dominion  is  an  everlasting  dominion 
which  shall  not  pass  away  and  His  kingdom  that  which 
shall  not  be  destroyed."  When  Daniel  saw  these  things 
it  greatly  troubled  him.  His  very  soul  trembled  at  that 
diverse  beast  with  the  ten  horns  and  the  little  horn  pluck- 
ing up  three  horns  and  its  awful  power,  while  he  was 
thrilled  at  the  exaltation  of  the  king  of  the  fifth  empire. 
And  this  section  goes  on  to  show  how  his  mind  puts 
questions.  What  is  the  meaning  of  this  fourth  beast  and 
the  meaning  of  that  little  horn,  and  what  is  the  meaning 
of  one  like  the  Son  of  Man  coming  in  the  clouds  of 
heaven  to  the  Ancient  of  Days?  I  said  that  the  first 
prophetic  section  showed  the  kingdom  of  heaven  as  it 
was  set  up.  How  the  gospel  of  it  commenced:  "The 
kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand."  The  King  came  and  was 
acknowledged  at  His  baptism,  and  He  was  manifested 
on  Palm  Sunday  that  preceded  His  crucifixion.  But  this 
chapter  shows  His  exaltation  and  enthronement.  When 
He  left  the  earth  after  His  crucifixion  the  last  sight  they 


9«  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

had  of  Him,  He  was  going  up  in  the  clouds.  This  chap- 
ter takes  that  thought  up :  "I  saw  one  hke  the  Son  of 
Man  coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven  to  the  Ancient  of 
Days."  Peter  saw  Him  going  up,  Daniel  sees  Him  after 
he  gets  there,  and  as  He  goes  up,  we  find  the  fulfilment 
of  the  Psalm,  "Lift  up  your  heads,  O  ye  gates,  and  be 
ye  lifted  up  ye  everlasting  doors  and  let  the  King  of 
Glory  come  in.  Who  is  this  King  of  Glory?  The  Lord 
of  hosts,  mighty  to  save."  We  find  Psalm  2  fulfilled: 
"Why  do  the  heathen  rage  and  the  people  imagine  a  vain 
thing?  Yet  have  I  set  my  King  upon  my  holy  hill  of 
Zion."  We  find  another  Psalm  fulfilled  :  "The  Lord  said 
^nto  my  Lord,  Sit  thou  at  my  right  hand  until  I 
make  thine  enemies  thy  footstool."  Now  it  is  this 
prophecy  of  Daniel  which  first  of  all  shows  the  exaltation 
and  enthronement  and  mediatorial  rule  of  the  Messiah. 

The  IMessiah's  work  here  on  earth  was  preparatory  to 
His  heavenly  rule.  His  work  here  on  earth  was  expia- 
tory, but  when  He  rose  from  the  dead  He  went  up  to 
take  His  seat  at  the  right  hand  of  the  majesty  on  high 
and  there  He  sits  as  King,  reigns  as  King  and  judges  the 
nations  until  the  time  of  His  second  advent.  So  what 
the  theologians  call  the  session  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  sitting 
of  Jesus  Christ  at  the  right  hand  of  the  Father  on  high, 
is  all  the  time  a  session  of  judgments,  of  rulings,  of  gov- 
ernments over  the  afifairs  of  this  world,  reigning  as  head 
over  all  things  to  His  people,  and  causing  all  things  to 
work  together  for  their  good  and  bringing  to  pass  the 
overturning  of  every  obstacle  that  opposes  the  dissemi- 
nation of  His  truth  and  bringing  the  whole  earth  in 
subjection  to  Him.  That  is  the  clear  teaching  of  this 
passage. 

Here  it  is  important  for  the  reader  to  see  Nebuchad- 
nezzar in  the  day  of  his  greatest  glory  looking  around 


RELATED  PROPHETIC  SECTIONS         93 

upon  the  brazen  walls  of  Babylon,  its  terraced  gardens  in 
the  skies,  its  marvelous  buildings  and  temples  of  its  gods, 
and  he  feeling  that  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  were  sub- 
ject to  him  and  saying,  "This  is  that  great  Babylon  which 
I  have  built."  Take  a  look  at  the  glory  of  that  empire. 
Then  we  see  Alexander  coming,  conquering  the  world 
and  weeping  that  there  are  no  more  worlds  to  conquer, 
and  there  we  have  a  high  conception  of  world-power. 
We  see  Rome  attaining  the  universal  supremacy  under 
the  Csesars,  and  that  glory  is  great.  Then  the  succeeding 
Rome  of  the  papacy  has  a  peculiar  glory,  but  the  glory 
of  the  King  of  the  fifth  empire  as  here  described  infinitely 
surpasses  all.  It  prepares  us  to  understand  how  com- 
forting was  the  vision  of  this  throne  in  glory  (Rev.  4), 
after  considering  the  confused  condition  of  the  churches 
on  earth  (Rev.  2  and  3).  The  church-view  on  earth  was 
depressing;  the  glory-view  in  heaven  was  cheering.  The 
earth-view  of  typical  Israel  was  depressing  to  Isaiah  and 
Ezekiel ;  their  heavenly  view  of  the  throne  above  was 
cheering  (Isa.  6  and  Ezek.  i). 

To  Daniel  the  vision  of  succeeding  world-empires,  all 
oppressing  the  saints,  whether  merely  political,  or  religio- 
political,  was  very  depressing,  but  the  vision  of  the  session 
of  Messiah  at  the  right  hand  of  God  as  everlasting  priest, 
and  King  of  kings,  was  cheering  in  its  assurance  that  the 
saints  would  yet  possess  the  earth.  A  long  time  off, 
indeed,  but  coming.  Many  centuries  of  intervening  trials, 
indeed,  yet  temporary. 

QUESTIONS 

1.  What  is  the  meaning  of  the  sea,  and  the  winds  in  chapter  7? 

2.  Show  the  correspondence  of  the  four  beasts  of  this  vision 
with  four  sections  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  dream-image  in  chapter 
2,  and  then  show  the  added  details  and  changes  of  the  first  three 
here. 


94  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

3.  Particularly,  what  is  the  addition  to  the  fourth  world-empire 
in  the  vision,  and  wherein  the  diversity,  and  what  the  meaning 
of  this  transformation  of  the  fourth  government? 

4.  What  supernatural  ministry,  good  and  bad,  has  to  do  with 
the  rise  of  nations? 

5.  Show  from  the  corresponding  part  of  Revelation  what 
supernatural  force  causes  the  rise  of  this  fourth  world-empire 
and  was  the  mighty  factor  in  its  change  into  a  diverse  world- 
empire. 

6.  According  to  Rev.  13,  what  and  who  was  the  head  of  this 
diverse  world-empire  ? 

7.  What  special  advance  in  thought  of  the  5th  world-empire 
in  this  vision? 

8.  When  did  this  enthronement  of  the  King  of  the  Fifth 
Empire  occur  and  what  Old  Testament  prophecies  did  it  fulfill? 

9.  Show  how  a  vision  of  this  throne  of  grace  cheered  Isaiah. 
Ezekiel,  and  Daniel,  in  their  days  of  typical  Israel,  and  how  a 
similar  vision  cheered  John  on  Patmos,  in  the  days  of  the  anti- 
typical  Israel. 

10.  This  session  of  the  Messiah  at  the  right  hand  of  God  as 
everlasting  priest  and  king,  is  for  what  and  for  how  long,  and  to 
be  followed  by  what? 


VIII 

THE  PROPHETIC  SECTIONS   OF  DANIEL 

(Continued) 

Scripture:    Dan.  8:1-27 

THIS  chapter  considers  the  fifth  prophetic  section 
of  the  book  of  Daniel  found  in  chapter  8.  The 
theme  of  the  chapter  is,  The  overthrow  of  the 
Medo-Persian  Empire  by  Alexander  the  Great,  the  four- 
fold division  of  his  empire,  and  the  oppression  of  Israel 
by  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  a  later  king  of  one  of  the  four 
divisions. 

The  date  of  the  prophecy  is  the  third  year  of  the  reign 
of  Belshazzar,  and  if  we  had  observed  the  order  of  time, 
both  this  and  the  preceding  chapter  would  have  come 
before  the  history  in  the  fifth  chapter. 

The  language  of  this  eighth  chapter  is  Hebrew,  that 
is,  the  Hebrew  language  is  resumed  here  and  continued 
to  the  end.  The  middle  section  of  the  book  of  Daniel  is 
in  Aramaic.  The  place  of  the  vision  cannot  be  deter- 
mined from  the  language  of  the  book,  but  here  is  what  it 
says : 

"In  the  third  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Belshazzar  a 
vision  appeared  unto  me,  to  me,  Daniel,  after  that  which 
had  appeared  unto  me  at  the  first  [he  had  seen  a  vision 
the  first  year  of  Belshazzar's  reign],  and  I  saw  in  the 
vision  and  it  came  to  pass  in  my  seeing  that  I  was  at 
Shushan,  the  capital,  which  is  in  the  province  of  Elam, 

95 


96  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

and  I  saw  in  the  vision  as  though  I  was  by  the  river 
Ulai"  (I  am  quoting  from  the  Jewish  version  for  a  par- 
ticular reason  on  this  lesson).  It  does  not  follow  that 
Daniel  was  at  Shushan  (or  Susa,  as  the  name  is  more 
generally  called)  in  the  body.  It  may  only  mean  that  he 
was  there  in  vision,  just  as  in  Ezekiel  he  says,  "In  a 
vision,  I  was  at  Jerusalem,"  though  he  never  left  the 
place  of  his  captivity  in  Babylon.  Suza,  or  Shushan, 
which  later  became  the  Persian  capital  under  Cyrus,  had 
long  been  a  noted  place.  We  have  a  monumental  inscrip- 
tion concerning  it  made  by  Asshur-banipal,  the  Assyrian 
king,  who  conquered  Manasseh  b.  c.  668,  at  least  sixty 
years  before  the  Babylonian  empire  obtained  its  suprem- 
acy, and  a  century  and  a  half  before  the  Persian 
supremacy,  to  this  effect :  "Shushan,  the  great  city,  the 
seat  of  their  gods,  the  place  of  their  oracles,  I  captured" ; 
that  is,  Assyria  had  its  supremacy  before  Babylonia,  and 
before  the  days  of  the  Assyrian  supremacy  Susa  was  a 
great  city  and  the  capital  of  Elam.  So  we  need  not  be 
disturbed  by  the  contention  of  the  radical  critics  that 
Daniel  mentions  the  city  and  palace  at  Susa  before  the 
Persians  came  into  power  and  made  it  their  capital.  In 
the  later  books  of  Nehemiah  and  Esther,  Susa  is  the  Per- 
sian capital,  but  long  before  Daniel's  day  it  was  a  great 
city  and  the  capital  of  Elam.  This  vision  presents  the 
river  Ulai.  It  was  a  small  artificial  river  near  Susa, 
connecting  two  other  rivers,  and  Pliny,  a  Roman  writer, 
calls  it  Eulaeris.  Asshur-banipal  boasts  that  he  covered 
its  waters  with  blood.  We  come  now  to  the  vision  that 
he  saw. 

First,  the  ram.  The  text  says,  "And  I  lifted  up  mine 
eyes  and  saw  and  behold  there  was  a  ram  standing  be- 
fore the  river  and  he  had  two  horns  and  the  horns  were 
high,  but  one  was  higher  than  the  other,  and  the  highest 


RELATED  PROPHETIC  SECTIONS         97 

one  came  up  last.  I  saw  this  ram  butting  westward, 
northward,  and  southward."  He  comes  from  the  east 
himself,  and  he  doesn't  butt  backward.  The  directions 
of  the  progress  of  the  empire  are  signified.  "So  that  no 
beast  could  stand  before  him,  and  no  one  was  there  to 
deliver  out  of  his  hand,  and  he  did  according  to  his  will 
and  became  great."  In  the  second  chapter  and  thirty- 
second  verse  the  symbol  of  the  Medo-Persian  empire  is 
the  breast  and  the  two  arms  of  silver;  the  breast  indi- 
cates its  unity  and  the  arms  its  duality.  Its  character- 
istic in  that  first  vision  is  its  inferiority  to  the  Babylonian 
Empire.  In  the  seventh  chapter  and  fifth  verse  (which 
we  considered  in  the  last  chapter)  the  symbol  is  the  bear 
with  one  side  higher  than  the  other.  The  unity  is  in  the 
one  animal  and  the  duality  is  in  the  two  sides,  with  this 
distinction,  that  one  side  is  higher  than  the  other.  There 
it  appears  with  three  ribs  in  its  teeth,  indicating  extent 
of  its  power  over  Assyria,  Babylonia,  and  Egypt,  the 
great  countries  heretofore  related  to  Israel.  Its  charac- 
teristic is  a  devouver,  but  here  the  symbol  of  this  second 
empire,  the  Medo-Persian,  is  a  ram.  The  unity  is  ex- 
pressed in  the  one  beast,  its  duality  in  the  two  horns; 
the  distinction  is  that  one  horn  is  higher  than  the  other 
and  a  new  distinction — it  is  the  second  horn  which  is  the 
higher,  that  is,  the  rise  of  the  Persian  power  was  later 
than  that  of  the  Medes,  but  it  went  higher  after  it  got 
started.  Here  also,  instead  of  the  three  ribs  of  the  bear, 
we  have  the  true  directions  of  its  conquest,  the  ram 
coming  from  the  east  pushes  westward,  that  is,  from 
Babylon  to  the  Mediterranean  Sea;  pushes  northward, 
that  is,  to  the  old  realm  of  Assyria,  even  up  to  the  Cas- 
pian Sea ;  pushes  southward,  that  is,  to  Egypt.  So  that 
these  pushings  agree  with  the  three  ribs  we  had  in  a 
preceding  section.     His  characteristic  here  is  that  he  is 


98  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

a  conqueror,  for  our  record  says,  "No  beast  could  stand 
before  him,  neither  was  there  any  that  could  deliver  out 
of  his  hand,  for  he  did  according  to  his  will  and  magnified 
himself."  I  have  several  times  called  attention  to  these 
developments  by  an  elaboration  of  details  from  the  first 
vision  in  the  second  chapter  of  this  book.  These  develop- 
ments are  obvious  and  evident.  In  like  manner  we  may 
trace  the  developments  in  the  third  empire. 

I  will  first  give  what  the  text  says:  "And  as  I  was 
looking  attentively  at  the  ram,  behold,  there  came  a 
shaggy  he-goat  from  the  west."  The  ram  was  from  the 
east,  but  the  goat  is  coming  from  the  west.  "He  came 
from  the  west  over  the  face  of  the  whole  earth  without 
touching  the  ground."  I  suppose  he  means,  except  in 
the  high  places.  "And  the  goat  had  a  sightly  large  horn 
between  his  eyes  and  he  came  as  far  as  the  ram  that 
had  two  horns  that  I  had  seen  standing  before  the  river, 
and  he  ran  at  him  with  furious  power."  We  can  see  with 
our  imagination  that  goat.  "And  I  saw  him  coming 
closer  unto  the  ram."  The  old  saying  is  that  we  can  never 
conquer  until  we  shorten  our  sword,  that  is,  by  fighting 
at  close  range.  The  goat  believes  in  fighting  at  close 
range.  "I  saw  him  coming  closer  unto  the  ram  and  he 
became  highly  enraged  against  the  ram  and  struck  the 
ram  and  broke  his  two  horns,  and  there  was  no  power 
in  the  ram  to  stand  before  him,  and  he  cast  him  down 
to  the  ground  and  stamped  upon  him.  And  there  was 
no  one  to  deliver  the  ram  out  of  his  hand,  and  the 
shaggy  he-goat  became  very  great." 

In  Daniel  2:32  the  symbol  of  this  third  empire  is  the 
lower  part  of  the  body  of  the  image  and  the  thighs,  the 
body  indicating  the  unity,  the  thighs  the  duality,  or  only 
those  two  divisions  which  touch  the  history  of  Israel. 
Its  characteristic  there  is  the  universality  of  its  con- 


RELATED  PROPHETIC  SECTIONS         99 

quests,  "which  shall  bear  rule  over  all  the  earth."  In 
the  seventh  chapter  and  sixth  verse,  presented  in  our 
last  chapter,  the  symbol  is  the  four-winged  leopard,  the 
wings  indicating  its  speed  of  conquest,  just  like  that  goat 
coming  without  touching  the  ground ;  the  one  beast  indi- 
cates the  unity,  the  four  heads  indicating  its  subsequent 
divisions  and  its  characteristic,  "and  dominion  was  given 
to  it." 

In  this  chapter  the  symbol  of  the  same  empire  is  a 
he-goat  coming  from  the  west,  as  the  ram  had  come  from 
the  east,  and  the  charactertistic  is  "over  the  whole  earth 
and  touched  not  the  ground,"  which  answers  to  the  wings 
of  the  leopard  and  indicates  the  speed  of  his  conquests. 
The  one  great  horn  indicates  the  unity  of  the  kingdom 
under  its  first  king,  who  magnifies  himself  exceedingly ; 
the  fury  and  destructive  power  of  his  assault  on  the  ram 
is  very  vividly  imaged.  The  four  notable  horns  that 
came  up  after  the  one  great  horn  was  broken  off,  indi- 
cates the  division  of  his  empire  into  four  parts  after 
the  death  of  the  first  king,  but  with  only  two  of  these 
four  parts  is  this  book  concerned. 

The  symbolism  now  advances  to  an  entirely  new  ele- 
ment. I  quote  from  the  text:  "And  out  of  one  of  the 
four  horns  came  forth  a  little  horn  which  became  ex- 
ceedingly great  toward  the  south  and  toward  the  east 
and  toward  the  glorious  land,"  that  is,  toward  Eg}^pt, 
toward  the  old  Persian  realm,  and  toward  Judea  par- 
ticularly. I  continue  the  record:  "And  it  became  great 
even  up  to  the  hosts  of  heaven,  and  cast  down  to  the 
ground  some  of  the  host  and  of  the  saints  and  trod 
them  under  his  foot.  Yea,  it  magnified  itself  even  up 
to  the  Prince  of  the  Hosts  and  by  it  the  continual  sacrifice 
was  taken  away  and  the  place  of  His  sanctuary  was 
cast  down  and  the  host  is  given  up  together  with  the 


100  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

continual  sacrifice  by  reason  of  trangression  and  it  cast- 
eth  down  the  truth  to  the  ground  and  it  doeth  this  and 
is  prosperous."  In  the  same  chapter  we  have  the  inter- 
pretation commencing  at  the  twentieth  verse :  "The  ram 
that  thou  sawest  with  the  two  horns  signifieth  the  king 
of  the  Medes  and  Persians,  and  the  shaggy  he-goat  is 
the  king  of  Greece,  and  the  great  horn  which  is  between 
his  eyes  is  the  first  king  [that  is,  Alexander  the  Great] 
but  that  it  was  broken  [Alexander  died  in  Babylon]  and 
that  four  others  sprang  up  into  its  stead,  signifies  that 
four  kingdoms  will  spring  up  out  of  the  nation,  but  not 
with  his  power,"  that  is,  no  one  of  these  will  equal  the 
power  of  "Alexander  the  Great. 

Any  schoolboy  who  is  familiar  with  the  history  of 
Alexander  the  Great  knows  that  even  at  his  death  he 
made  provision  for  this  division  of  his  kingdom.  The 
divisions  were  these:  (i)  Macedonia,  including  Greece 
proper,  was  one,  Cassander,  the  king.  Now  with  that 
we  have  very  little  to  do  in  this  book.  (2)  Asia  Minor 
went  to  Lysimachus.  With  that  we  have  very  little  to  do. 
(3)  Syria  was  assigned  to  Seleucus.  With  that  we  have 
the  most  to  do.  (4)  Egypt  was  given  to  Ptolemy. 
With  that  we  have  much  to  do  in  this  book. 

This  book,  when  referring  to  Syria,  that  division  of 
Alexander's  empire  with  its  capital  at  Antioch,  calls  it 
the  kingdom  of  the  North,  and  Egypt  is  called  the  king- 
dom of  the  South.  The  rulers  of  Syria  were  called 
Seleucidae  from  Seleucus,  the  general  that  obtained  that 
kingdom ;  the  Egyptian  kings  were  called  Ptolemies  from 
Ptolemy,  that  great  general  of  Alexander  who  obtained 
that  kingdom. 

We  will  now  go  on  with  the  interpretation.  "And  in 
the  latter  time  of  their  kingdom,"  that  is,  of  the  kingdom 
of  these  four  divisions  later  on  in  history,  "when  the 


RELATED  PROPHETIC  SECTIONS       101 

transgressors  have  filled  their  measure  of  guilt,"  that 
is,  the  Jewish  transgressors,  "there  will  arise  a  king  [now 
we  come  to  the  little-horn  man],  of  an  impudent  face 
and  understanding  deep  schemes,  and  his  power  will  be 
mighty,  but  not  by  his  own  power;  and  he  will  destroy 
wonderfully,  and  he  will  prosper  while  he  doeth  this,  and 
he  will  destroy  very  many  of  the  people  of  the  saints, 
and  through  his  intelligence,  and  because  he  prospereth 
is  craftiness  in  his  hand,  and  in  his  heart  will  he  magnify 
himself  and  in  peace  will  he  destroy  many.  He  will  also 
stand  up  against  the  Prince  of  princes,"  that  is,  the  God 
of  heaven  himself,  "but  without  human  hand  will  he  be 
broken."    That  is  the  interpretation. 

When  Daniel  saw  the  vision  of  the  ram  with  his  two 
horns,  the  he-goat  with  one  horn,  the  destruction  of  the 
ram,  the  death  of  the  first  king,  or  the  breaking  of  the 
horn  of  the  he-goat,  the  rising  up  of  four  kingdoms  in 
the  place  of  Alexander's  kingdom  and  later  on  in  the 
Grecian  history,  that  is  to  say,  about  140  years,  there 
comes  to  the  throne  of  Syria  by  craftiness  of  his  own 
power  a  king  known  in  history  as  Antiochus  Epiphanes. 
Some  of  his  contemporaries  call  him  Antiochus  Epimanes, 
which  means,  "mad  man,"  making  a  play  upon  the  word. 
This  Antiochus  Epiphanes  [we  find  an  account  of  what 
he  did,  not  only  here  in  this  book  but  in  First  Maccabees] 
makes  war  with  Eg}^pt.  His  object  is  this:  He  wants 
to  hedge  against  the  rising  power  of  Rome,  the  fourth 
empire,  before  which  Macedonia  and  Asia  Minor  have 
already  fallen.  In  order  to  do  this  he  seeks  to  unite  the 
Egyptian  division  with  the  Syrian  division  and  half-way 
between  him  and  Egypt  is  the  Holy  Land,  and  in  order 
to  make  his  kingdom,  as  he  lays  it  out  in  his  mind, 
homogeneous,  he  wants  but  one  religion  in  it,  just  as 
Louis  XIV  said  there  could  be  but  one  religion  in  France, 


102  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

that  is,  Roman  Catholicism,  deeming  it  necessary  to  the 
safety  of  the  stale  to  have  no  troubles  about  religion. 
So  after  he  had  defeated  the  king  of  Eg)-pt  in  battle  in 
the  143rd  year  of  the  Grecian  supremacy,  he  came  to 
Jerusalem  and  took  it,  and  took  away  its  sacred  vessels. 
A  great  many  of  the  apostate  Jews  had  determined  to 
unite  with  him  on  this  one  religion.  Men  that  would 
be  called  Sadducees  in  a  later  day  (and  they  started 
about  this  time),  men  that  thought  religion  should  yield 
to  political  necessities,  made  a  covenant  with  him,  and  so 
he  established  in  the  city  of  Jerusalem  the  idol-worship 
of  Jupiter,  and  these  apostate  Jews  joined  him  in  it.  He 
sacrificed  a  hog  on  the  sacred  altar  and  positively  forbade 
any  Jew  to  observe  the  commandments  of  IMoses'  law. 
They  were  not  to  be  circumcised,  they  were  not  to  make 
an  ofifering  in  the  temple.  The  whole  sacrifice  should 
cease — that  continual  offering  every  evening  and  every 
morning  that  they  had  been  used  to  since  the  days  of 
Solomon.  Ever  since  the  days  of  Moses  in  the  wilder- 
ness that  evening  and  morning  service  had  been  kept 
up.  He  took  away  that  continual  sacrifice,  and  defiled 
the  temple.  That  put  him  against  the  God  of  heaven 
himself.  This  erection  of  an  idol  in  the  Holy  Place  is 
the  first  Abomination  of  Desolation.  It  was  one  of  the 
most  blasphemous  and  wicked  usurpations  of  power 
known  to  history,  made  him  the  first  anti-christ  and 
handed  down  his  name  to  the  execration  of  all  succeed- 
ing generations.  The  first  book  of  Maccabees  will  ever 
be  regarded  as  a  glorious  history  of  this  dark  period. 

The  record  now  passes  to  a  new  theme.  The  Voices  of 
the  Angels,  showing  heaven's  interest  in  these  tragic 
earthly  affairs:  "Then  did  I  hear  a  certain  holy  one 
speaking,  and  a  holy  one  said  unto  the  unknown  one  who 
was  speaking.  For  how  long  is  the  vision  concerning  the 


RELATED  PROPHETIC  SECTIONS       103 

continual  sacrifice,  and  the  wasting  transgression,  to  give 
up  both  the  sanctuary  and  host  to  be  trodden  under 
foot?"  Well  might  angels  be  concerned.  There  had 
been  no  interruption  of  this  continual  sacrifice  for  many 
centuries.  Paul  says,  "Though  I  speak  with  the  tongues 
of  men  and  of  angels."  Daniel  now  hears  the  angels 
talking,  and  understands  what  they  say.  One  holy  one 
says  to  another  holy  one,  "How  long  is  this  to  last,  this 
subjection  of  the  host,  that  is,  the  people  of  Israel,  this 
cessation  of  the  continual  sacrifice;  how  long  is  to  last?" 
Fourteenth  verse:  "And  he  said  unto  him.  Until  two 
thousand  three  hundred  evenings  and  mornings,  when 
the  sanctuary  shall  be  justified,"  i.  e.,  purified  or  cleansed. 
Two  thousand  and  three  hundred  days.  I  said  that  in 
the  143rd  year  of  the  Greek  history  Antiochus  took  Jeru- 
salem and  in  the  149th  year  Antiochus  died.  By  taking 
the  month  dates  in  these  years,  the  interval  is  six  years 
and  one  hundred  and  ten  days.  Counting  a  year  360 
days,  which  the  Jews  did,  that  makes  2,300  days  from 
the  day  that  he  entered  Jerusalem  and  subjected  the  host 
of  the  Jews  to  him  until  by  his  death  their  oppression 
ceased,  so  far  as  he  was  concerned.  It  was  not  2,300 
days  until  Judas  Maccabeus  recaptured  Jerusalem  and 
purified  the  sanctuary,  but  the  question  covers  more  than 
the  purification  of  the  sanctuary;  the  question  pro- 
pounded was  this :  "For  how  long  is  the  vision  concern- 
ing the  continual  sacrifice  and  wasting  transgression  to 
give  up  hoth  the  sanctuary  and  the  host  to  be  trodden 
under  foot  ?"  The  answer  is  2,300  days  in  the  first  book 
of  Maccabees. 

The  Son  of  God 

We  now  come  to  a  still  more  marvelous  thing — more 
marvelous  than  the  voices  of  the  angels  to  which  Daniel 


104  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

has  been  listening.  Here  is  a  new  thing,  15th  verse: 
"And  it  came  to  pass  when  I,  even  I,  Daniel,  saw  the 
vision,  and  sought  for  understanding,  that,  behold,  there 
was  standing  opposite  to  me  something  like  the  appear- 
ance of  a  man."  Here  we  learn  first  that  Daniel  did  not 
understand  his  own  vision,  but  sought  to  understand  it. 
The  contention  of  the  radical  critics  that  a  prophet  is 
conscious  of  the  meaning  of  his  prophecy  and  therefore 
limits  his  prophecy  to  the  matters  of  his  own  time  of 
which  he  has  information,  is  every  way  baseless.  A 
passage  from  the  New  Testament  is  very  pertinent  here, 
I  Pet.  1 :  10-12:  "Concerning  which  salvation  the  prophets 
sought  and  searched  diligently,  who  prophesied  of  the 
grace  that  should  come  unto  you,  searching  what  time 
or  what  manner  of  time,  the  Spirit  of  Christ  which  was 
in  them  did  point  unto,  when  it  testified  beforehand  the 
sufferings  of  Christ,  and  the  glories  that  should  follow 
them.  To  whom  it  was  revealed,  that  not  unto  them- 
selves, but  unto  you,  did  they  minister  these  things,  which 
now  have  been  announced  unto  you  through  them  that 
preached  the  gospel  unto  you  by  the  Holy  Spirit  sent  forth 
from  heaven,  which  things  angels  desire  to  look  into." 
Not  only  the  prophets  did  not  understand,  but  the  angels 
in  heaven  do  not  understand  all  the  things  foretold  in 
symbol,  ceremonial,  type,  vision  and  prophecy.  They  are 
themselves  instructed  by  the  church  in  the  events  as  they 
are  fulfilled.  Ephesians  3:8-11:  "Unto  me,  who  am 
less  than  the  least  of  all  saints,  was  this  grace  given,  to 
preach  unto  the  Gentiles  the  unsearchable  riches  of 
Christ ;  and  to  make  all  men  see  what  is  the  dispensa- 
tion of  the  mystery  which  for  ages  hath  been  hid  in  God, 
who  created  all  things ;  to  the  intent  that  now  unto  the 
principalities  and  the  powers  in  the  heavenly  places  might 
be  made  known  through  the  Church  the  manifold  wisdom 


RELATED  PROPHETIC  SECTIONS       105 

of  God."  Daniel  couldn't  understand  what  he  saw,  and 
angels,  unless  instructed,  cannot  understand. these  future 
events.  They  have  no  omniscience,  but  as  the  church  in 
its  history  unfolds,  unrolls  the  wisdom  of  God,  foretold 
for  future  ages,  the  onlooking  angels  see  and  understand, 
"which  things  the  angels  desire  to  look  into,"  and  that 
curiosity  of  the  angels  is  admirably  expressed  in  the 
golden  cherubim  with  outspread  wings  bending  over  and 
looking  intently  down  upon  the  blood-stained  mercy-seat. 
But  the  chief  thing  is:  "There  was  standing  opposite 
to  me  something  like  the  appearance  of  a  man  and  I 
heard  the  voice  of  a  man."  This  occurs  between  the 
banks  of  the  Ulai,  "and  it  called  and  said,  Gabriel,  cause 
this  one  to  understand  this  vision."  That  was  a  pre- 
mani testation  of  Christ.  We  will  come  to  another  far 
more  startling  pre-manifestation  when  we  get  to  the  tenth 
chapter,  but  Christ  was  there  as  the  Son  of  God,  and 
Daniel  felt  His  presence,  saw  the  form  like  the  form 
of  the  Son  of  Man,  which  didn't  speak  to  Daniel,  but  He 
spoke  to  the  Angel  Gabriel,  and  tells  Gabriel  to  explain 
to  Daniel.  "So  he  came  close  to  where  I  stood  and  when 
he  came  I  was  terrified.  I  fell  on  my  face.  But  he  said 
unto  me.  Oh  son  of  man ;  for  the  time  of  the  end  shall 
be  the  vision.  Now  as  he  was  speaking  with  me  I  fell 
down  in  amazement  on  my  face  to  the  ground  but  he 
touched  me  and  set  me  upright  where  I  had  been  stand- 
ing." In  Genesis  15,  Abraham  sees  in  vision  the  Word 
of  God.  That  is  the  first  time  the  phrase,  "Word  of 
God,"  occurs.  He  saw  the  Logos,  and  the  Logos  talks 
with  him,  and  after  a  while  takes  hold  of  his  hand  and 
leads  him  out  of  the  tent  and  tells  him  to  look  up  and 
count  the  stars  of  heaven  if  he  can,  and  to  know  that  his 
seed  will  be  more  numerous  than  they.  We  had  one  pre- 
manifestation  of  the  Son  of  God,  a  fourth  one,  walking 


108  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

with  them  in  the  furnace.  Thus  the  Son  of  God  himself, 
through  Gabriel,  gives  the  interpretation  we  have  already 
considered. 

The  Death  of  Antiochus 

The  fortunes  of  this  wicked  king  were  fast  becoming 
desperate.  Egypt  was  lost  on  the  South,  Rome  had 
checked  him  there  and  was  pressing  him  hard  on  the 
East.  His  affairs  in  Judea,  under  his  generals,  were  in 
bad  shape  through  the  triumphs  of  Judas  Maccabeus.  He 
needed  money  to  enlist  and  support  a  larger  army  against 
the  victorious  Jews.  In  this  extremity  he  determines  to 
seize  the  rich  city  of  Elymais,  in  Persia,  and  rob  its 
temple,  stored  with  rich  offerings  under  Persian  rule 
and  still  richer  gifts  from  the  liberality  of  Alexander  the 
Great.  Its  sturdy  citizens,  always  jealous  of  the  privi- 
leges of  the  city,  resisted  and  defeated  him.  This  dis- 
aster was  followed  by  the  news  of  the  triumph  of  Judas 
Maccabeus  over  his  general  Lysias,  the  recapture  of 
Jerusalem  and  the  purification  of  the  sanctuary.  The 
unwelcome  tidings  completely  broke  his  spirit.  He  died 
in  despair  by  the  judgment  of  God.  The  record  says, 
"broken  without  hand."  The  first  book  of  Maccabees, 
chapter  6,  gives  a  thrilling  account  of  his  downfall,  and 
says  that  in  his  dying  confession  he  attributed  all  his 
misfortune  to  his  persecution  of  the  Jews  and  their  reli- 
gion. His  doom  reminds  us  of  the  remorse  and  despair 
of  Judas  Iscariot. 

QUESTIONS 

1.  What  the  date  of  this  vision? 

2.  Where  the  scene  of  the  vision? 

3.  How  do  you  reply  to  the  contention  of  the  critics  that  ref- 
erence to  Susa  indicates  a  late  origin  of  the  book? 

4.  To  which  two  world-empires  is  the  vision  limited? 


RELATED  PROPHETIC  SECTIONS       107 

5.  Show  the  conformity  of  the  vision  with  the  preceding 
visions  (chapters  2  and  7)  in  their  relation  to  these  two  empires, 
and  what  new  details  appear  here? 

6.  Who  is  the  "little  horn"  of  this  vision  and  how  is  it  dis- 
tinguished from  the  "little  horn"  in  chapter  7? 

7.  What  the  most  infamous  deed  of  Antiochus? 

8.  What  political  reasons  prompted  him  to  destroy  the  re- 
ligion of  Jehovah,  and  what  parallel  in  later  history  for  similar 
reasons? 

9.  What  was  the  abomination  of  desolation  he  placed  in  the 
temple? 

10.  What  great  hero  overthrew  his  power  in  Judea  and  puri- 
fied the  Temple? 

11.  What  Jewish  Inter-Biblical  book  gives  a  thrilling  history 
of  this  period? 

12.  Give  an  account  of  the  death  of  Antiochus  and  its 
occasion. 

13.  How  do  you  explain  the  time  period,  2,300  evenings  and 
mornings  ? 

14.  What  interest  in  heaven  was  excited  by  the  impiety  of 
Antiochus? 

15.  What  voices  did  Daniel  hear?  What  desire  did  these 
voices  excite  in  Daniel? 


IX 

THE  MARVELOUS   NINTH  CHAPTER  OF 
DANIEL 

Scripture:  Dan.  9:1-27 

THIS  chapter  contains  the  most  marvelous  prophecy 
of  the  Old  Testament.  It  is  also  the  most  remark- 
able in  its  Messianic  features.  More  definitely  than 
all  others  together,  it  fixes  the  date  of  the  first  coming  of 
the  Messiah.  Accordingly,  its  confirmation  in  the  New 
Testament,  especially  when  considered  with  its  cognate 
visions,  goes  beyond  any  other  Old  Testament  book 
except  the  Law.  Our  Lord  himself  attests  it  in  a  most 
extraordinary  way.  Moreover,  in  every  age  since  its 
publication,  it  has  exceptionally  attracted  the  attention 
of  Old  Testament  students,  and  has  called  forth  a  vast 
volume  of  literature.  For  2,500  years  the  scholars  of 
the  world,  whether  saints  or  sinners,  Jews  or  Gentiles, 
Christians  or  infidels,  have  devoted  themselves  to  its 
exposition.  In  the  eflforts  to  defend,  on  the  one  hand,  or 
to  discredit  on  the  other,  every  word  in  it  has  been  under 
a  thousand  microscopes  of  criticism.  An  ordinary  life- 
time would  hardly  suffice  for  reading  all  the  literature 
pro  and  con  that  it  has  evoked.  Let  us,  reverently  and 
prayerfully,  address  ourselves  to  its  exposition. 

I  commence  by  submitting  this  first  and  simplest  out- 
line of  the  whole  chapter. 

I.    The  date  and  occasion  of  Daniel's  Prayer,  9:  1-2. 
II.    The  Prayer,  9:3-19. 

III.   The  answer  to  the  Prayer,  9:20-27. 

108 


NINTH  CHAPTER  OF  DANIEL  109 

I.   The  Date  and  Occasion 

The  date  is  the  first  year  of  Darius  the  Mede,  about 
one  year  after  the  capture  of  Babylon  by  the  Medes  and 
Persians,  and  about  one  year  before  the  end  of  Jere- 
miah's predicted  seventy  years  of  Jewish  servitude  to 
Babylon.  Daniel  is  studying  the  Jewish  Scriptures — all 
the  books  then  extant.  Our  English  word,  "books,"  in 
the  second  verse,  translates  a  Hebrew  term  in  the  plural 
that,  in  usage,  signifies  either  all  the  Jewish  Scriptures 
collectively,  or  a  group  of  them,  as  "the  Books  of  Moses," 
or  merely  an  epistle,  which  is  only  a  fragment  of  a  book, 
as  in  II  Kings  19:  14  and  Isaiah  ■^'j:  14. 

It  is  certain  that  Jeremiah  had  sent  a  letter  to  the 
Jews  in  Babylon,  which  embodies  much  of  the  precise 
matter  which  Daniel  is  studying,  and  to  whose  very  pecu- 
liarities of  phraseology  this  ninth  chapter  refers  several 
times.  So  far,  then,  as  one  example  of  the  usage  may 
determine,  it  may  be  that  it  is  only  Jeremiah's  letter  that 
Daniel  is  studying.  The  whole  context,  however,  seems 
to  require  the  meaning  that  the  more  extended  usage  of 
the  word  justifies.  The  whole  book  of  Jeremiah  was 
evidently  before  him,  since  the  letter  says  nothing  of 
"desolation,"  so  specially  clear  in  Jeremiah  25:11,  and 
so  pointedly  quoted  in  verse  2  of  this  chapter.  More- 
over, the  prayer  specially  cites  the  Law  of  Moses,  indi- 
cates familiarity  with  the  Psalms,  cites  not  only  the  con- 
tinuous history  of  the  people  as  recorded  by  the  prophets, 
but  also  the  message  of  the  prophets,  so  that  we  may 
conclude,  fairly,  that  Daniel  possessed  all  the  books  of 
the  canon  then  extant,  that  is  to  say,  all  but  Esther,  Ezra, 
Nehemiah,  II  Chronicles,  Haggai,  Zechariah  and  Malachi. 
At  any  rate,  one  of  the  particular  matters  engaging  his 
attention  is  Jeremiah's  prediction  of  the  seventy  years' 


110  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

servitude,  which  period  he  now  understands  to  be  near 
its  end.  So  that  we  need  first  to  consider  as  an  important 
element  of  the  occasion  of  Daniel's  prayer: 

(i)  Jeremiah's  Seventy  Years.  Some  have  supposed 
that  Jeremiah  predicts  two  periods  of  seventy  years — 
one  of  the  "servitude"  and  the  other  of  the  "desolation." 
The  three  most  important  passages  in  his  book  bearing 
on  the  matter  are :  25  :  8-12,  27 :  16-22,  and  29 :  i-io.  In 
these  passages  and  elsewhere  in  his  book,  the  prophet 
foretells,  with  precision,  the  end  of  an  independent  Jew- 
ish monarchy  by  the  servitude  of  the  kings  of  Judah  to 
Babylon,  the  deportation  of  certain  captives,  the  spolia- 
tion of  a  part  of  the  sacred  vessels  of  the  sanctuary,  and 
finally,  the  total  destruction  of  the  city,  with  a  larger 
deportation  of  captives.  The  prophet  then  foretells  that 
this  servitude  shall  last  seventy  years ;  that  these  cap- 
tives and  these  captured  vessels  shall  not  return  to  Jeru- 
salem before  that  time ;  that  this  captivity  is  by  the  will 
of  God,  whose  unconscious  servant  Nebuchadnezzar  is, 
and  is  meant  for  good  and  not  evil,  since  those  led  into 
captivity  shall  not  only  have  a  better  fate  than  is  reserved 
for  the  remnant  in  Judea,  but  that  the  captives  preserved 
in  Babylon  shall  become  the  true  seed  of  a  better  nation 
in  the  future.  He  therefore  urges  the  captives  to  indulge 
in  no  vain  hopes  of  speedy  release,  but  to  address  them- 
selves to  the  cultivation  of  the  land  assigned  to  them  in 
Babylon,  and  to  pray  for  the  peace  and  prosperity  of 
Babylon,  as  for  their  own  peace  and  prosperity.  He  then 
assures  them  that  at  the  end  of  the  seventy  years  they 
shall  return  to  their  native  land.  This  is  the  period  of 
seventy  years  which  furnishes  the  first  element  of  the 
occasion  of  Daniel's  prayer. 

Following  the  general  view  of  only  one  period  of 
seventy  years,  we  now  proceed  to  determine  its  beginning 


NINTH  CHAPTER  OF  DANIEL  111 

and  end.  The  period  commences  b.  c.  606,  in  the  third 
year  of  Jehoiakim,  king  of  Judah,  as  appears  from  II 
Kings  24: 1,  II  Chronicles  36:5-7,  Daniel  i :  i.  On  that 
date  the  independent  Jewish  monarchy  ends,  just  490 
years  after  the  coronation  of  Saul,  the  first  king,  which 
itself  was  just  490  years  after  the  entering  into  Canaan. 
Thus  the  monarchy  of  the  chosen  people  died  a  royal 
death  with  the  good  King  Josiah  at  the  battle  of 
Megiddo — a  battle  so  disastrous  that  it  becomes  the  type 
of  the  great  spiritual  battle  of  Armageddon  in  John's 
Apocalypse,  to  be  followed  by  the  battle  of  Jehoshaphat 
and  because  of  the  sorrows  of  apostate  Israel  on  behold- 
ing the  Messiah  whom  they  have  pierced.  True,  three 
members  of  Josiah's  family  held  the  throne  for  a  very 
few  years,  but  only  as  servants  of  the  king  of  Babylon. 
So  in  this  case  it  is  true  that  Jehoiakim,  bound  in  fetters, 
is  temporarily  released  and  retains  a  nominal  authority 
under  Nebuchadnezzar  by  yielding  to  his  spoiler  a  part 
of  the  sacred  vessels  of  the  Temple  and  certain  selected 
youths  of  the  royal  family,  including  Daniel,  who  are  to 
become  servants  in  the  imperial  household  of  Babylon. 
This  was  the  first  deportation  of  the  captives  from  Judea. 
With  this  beginning  of  the  period  fixed,  we  find  that  it 
ends  B.  c.  536,  according  to  the  express  statements  of 
II  Chronicles  36:24-25  and  Ezra  1:1-3,  which  is  the 
year  after  Cyrus  conquered  Babylon.  We  may,  there- 
fore, understand  why  this  prediction  of  the  seventy  years 
became  an  occasion  for  Daniel's  prayer — only  one  year 
remains  of  the  seventy.  Babylon  has  fallen  as  Jeremiah 
predicted,  but  there  is  no  sign  in  the  political  sky  of  the 
new  regime  to  intimate  the  return  of  the  captive  Jews. 
They  remain  in  bondage  to  the  Medes  and  Persians,  as 
they  had  been  to  Babylon.  Therefore,  Daniel  prays  for 
the  fulfillment  of  the  promise. 


112  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

(2)  The  second  element  in  the  occasion  of  the  prayer 
is  the  denunciation  of  the  Levitical  law,  that  for  every 
seventh  year  the  Holy  Land  was  denied  its  Sabbath  of 
rest,  the  people  should  remain  one  year  in  bondage  (Lev. 
25:2-4,  26:34-43;  H  Chron.  36:24).  From  Saul,  b.  c. 
1096,  to  Jehoiakim,  b.  c.  606 — just  490  years — the  land 
had  been  robbed  of  seventy  years  of  rest — one-seventh 
of  the  490 — so  this  is  as  precise  as  the  prophecy  of  Jere- 
miah in  fixing  the  limit  of  the  bondage. 

(3)  The  third  element  in  the  occasion  of  the  prayer  is 
the  curse  and  oath  of  Moses,  set  forth  so  vividly  in  the 
closing  chapters  of  Deuteronomy,  to  which  the  prayer  so 
feelingly  refers.  Indeed,  the  prayer  itself  recites  as  an 
occasion  of  the  troubles  of  the  people  their  continuous 
sins  through  every  period  of  their  history,  whether  under 
Moses,  the  judges,  or  the  kings — sins  against  both  the 
Sinaitic  covenant  and  the  repeated  messages  of  God 
through  the  prophets. 

(4)  A  fourth  occasion  of  the  prayer  may  be  fairly 
inferred  from  the  prayer  itself,  i.  e.,  the  prophet's  evident 
consciousness  that  no  real  atonement  had  ever  been  made 
for  the  sins  of  the  people.  Their  ritualistic  atonement 
had  merely  symbolized  the  true  remission  of  sins  and 
passed  them  over  to  be  provided  for  in  the  great  antitype 
of  the  ceremonial  law. 

(5)  Daniel's  previous  visions  also  may  well  constitute 
an  element  of  the  occasion  of  this  prayer.  From  his  in- 
interpretation  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  dream,  he  evidently 
saw  that  it  was  only  in  the  days  of  the  fourth  world- 
empire  that  the  God  of  heaven  would  set  up  His  gospel 
kingdom,  and  far,  far  beyond  its  setting  up,  the  stone 
becomes  a  mountain  and  fills  the  whole  earth.  Again,  in 
his  vision  of  the  four  beasts  rising  up  out  of  the  sea,  he 
evidently  understands  that  it  is  only  in  the  days  of  the 


NINTH  CHAPTER  OF  DANIEL  113 

fourth  beast  and  in  the  time  of  the  eleventh  horn  of  this 
beast,  calhng  for  a  remote  period  after  the  estabhshment 
of  the  fourth  world-empire,  does  the  Son  of  Man  receive 
His  kingdom  of  judgments  from  the  Ancient  of  Days, 
that  is  to  eventuate  in  putting  the  saints  of  the  Most  High 
in  possession  of  the  whole  earth.  And  yet,  again,  in  his 
visions  of  the  two  beasts,  representing  respectively  the 
second  and  third  world-empires,  he  beholds  his  people 
near  the  close  of  the  third  empire,  grievously  oppressed 
and  their  restored  sanctuary  defiled. 

Those  considerations,  taken  together — the  70  weeks  of 
Jeremiah,  the  curse  of  the  Levitical  law  concerning  the 
land,  the  curse  and  oath  of  Moses,  the  prophet's  con- 
sciousness that  the  sins  of  their  whole  national  history 
have  never  been  really  expiated,  but  only  passed  over, 
and  the  far  off  date  of  the  setting  up  of  Messiah's  gospel 
kingdom,  and  the  yet  more  distant  date  of  His  kingdom 
of  judgments,  and  the  still  more  distant  date  of  the 
prevalence  of  His  millennium  kingdom  throughout  the 
earth — these  constitute  sufficient  occasion  to  bow  down 
on  his  knees  in  fervent  prayer  the  best  and  the  wisest 
man.    So  far  the  occasion.    Let  us  now  consider 

n.     The  Prayer 

This  prayer  consists  of  three  parts :  Confession,  Adora- 
tion, and  Supplication. 

(i)  There  is  a  heart-broken  confession  of  the  continu- 
ous sins  of  the  whole  nation — judges,  kings  and  people — 
against  both  the  law  and  the  prophets  throughout  every 
period  of  their  history. 

(2)  Over  against  these  sins  of  the  people,  the  prophet, 
by  adoration  places  in  sharp  contrast  the  attributes  of 
God — eternal  righteousness,  long-suffering,  mercy,  for- 


114  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

giveness,  truthfulness  in  both  promises  and  threats,  and 
a  watching  providence  that  never  sleeps  and  that  never 
fails  to  bring  home  a  threatened  curse  or  a  promised 
blessing. 

(3)  Supplication:  How  fervent,  how  pathetic,  how 
importunate  his  prayer !  He  prays  for  the  holy,  but  deso- 
late, city :  "O  Lord,  turn  thine  anger  from  Jerusalem ;" 
he  prays  for  the  Temple :  "Shine  upon  thy  sanctuary  ;"  he 
prays  for  the  forgivenes  of  the  sins  of  the  people.  And 
all  this,  not  for  Jerusalem's  sake,  or  the  Temple's  sake, 
or  the  people's  sake,  but  for  God's  own  sake,  and  for  the 
sake  of  His  great  mercies.  The  prayer  closes  in  these 
burning  words :  "O  Lord,  hear !  O  Lord,  forgive  !  O 
Lord,  hearken  and  do ;  defer  not  for  Thine  own  sake,  O 
my  God!  For  Thy  city  and  Thy  people  are  called  by 
Thy  name." 

HL    The  Answer 

The  answer  is  instant.  As  Daniel  says,  "While  I  was 
speaking  and  praying  and  confessing  my  sin  and  the  sin 
of  my  people,  Israel,  and  presenting  my  supplication 
before  Jehovah,  my  God,  for  the  holy  mountain  of  my 
God ;  yea,  while  I  was  speaking  in  the  prayer,"  the  answer 
came;  or  as  the  one  who  brought  the  answer  says:  "At 
the  beginning  of  thy  supplications  the  commandment 
went  forth,  and  I  am  come  to  tell  thee." 

The  answer  was  not  only  instant,  but  mediate,  that  is 
to  say,  through  the  Angel  Gabriel:  "The  man  Gabriel, 
whom  I  had  seen  in  the  vision  at  the  beginning,  being 
caused  to  fly  swiftly,  touched  me  about  the  time  of  the 
evening  oblation,  and  he  instructed  me  and  talked  with 
me,  and  said,  O  Daniel,  I  am  now  come  forth  to  give  thee 
wisdom  and  understanding." 

The  answer  to  the  prayer,  as  conveyed  by  the  Angel 


NINTH  CHAPTER  OF  DANIEL  115 

Gabriel,  is  the  great  prophecy  which  we  are  now  to  ex- 
pound, and  which  is  thus  rendered  in  the  revised  version, 
standard  edition,  i.e.,  following  the  American  rather  than 
the  English  revisers :  "Seventy  weeks  are  decreed  upon 
thy  people  and  upon  thy  holy  city  to  finish  transgression, 
and  to  make  an  end  of  sins,  and  to  make  reconciliation 
for  iniquity,  and  to  bring  in  everlasting  righteousness, 
and  to  seal  up  vision  and  prophecy,  and  to  anoint  the 
most  holy.  Know  therefore  and  discern,  that  from  the 
going  forth  of  the  commandment  to  restore  and  to  build 
Jerusalem  unto  the  anointed  one,  the  Prince,  shall  be 
seven  weeks,  and  three  score  and  two  weeks ;  it  shall  be 
built  again,  with  street  and  moat,  even  in  troublous  times. 
And  after  the  three  score  and  two  weeks  shall  the 
anointed  one  be  cut  off,  and  shall  have  nothing ;  and  the 
people  of  the  Prince  that  shall  come  shall  destroy  the 
city  and  the  sanctuary ;  and  the  end  thereof  shall  be  with 
a  flood,  and  even  unto  the  end  shall  be  war ;  desolations 
are  determined.  And  he  shall  make  a  firm  covenant  with 
many  for  one  wek;  and  in  the  midst  of  the  week  He 
shall  cause  the  sacrifice  and  the  oblation  to  cease ;  and 
upon  the  wing  of  abominations  shall  come  one  that  maketh 
desolate ;  and  even  unto  the  full  end,  and  that  determined, 
shall  wrath  be  poured  out  upon  the  desolate." 

And  now,  before  an  attempt  at  exposition,  attention  is 
called  to  a  preliminary  observation :  There  are  many 
English  versions  of  this  Hebrew  text,  all  worthy  of  con- 
sideration, but  it  is  needful  for  the  present  purpose  to 
cite  only  four  modern  ones,  namely,  (i)  The  common, 
or  King  James  version;  (2)  The  Canterbury  revision; 
(3)  The  same  revision  with  the  renderings  of  the  Ameri- 
can corps  of  revisers  substituted  for  the  rendering  of  the 
British  corps  where  they  differ;  (4)  Leeser's  Jewish  ver- 
sion.    Now,  when  we  compare  their  several  translations 


116  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

of  this  prophecy,  we  find  a  marked  difference  in  the 
punctuation,  which  very  greatly  affects  the  sense,  and 
necessarily  determines  widely  different  lines  of  exegesis. 

The  exegesis  now  to  be  given  will  follow  the  punctua- 
tion of  the  American  revisers  in  the  Standard  Bible,  with 
which  the  King  James  version  agrees.  The  Canterbury 
revision  and  Leeser's  modern  Jewish  version  adopt  a 
punctuation  which  necessitates  a  certain  beginning  for 
the  period,  and  necessitates  two  Messiahs,  and  in  other 
important  respects  make  both  chronology  and  interpreta- 
tion impossible  on  any  theory  consistent  with  the  inspira- 
tion of  Daniel  or  of  the  New  Testament  writers,  or  of 
the  divinity  of  Jesus.  Tremendous  results  to  base  on 
punctuation  alone,  when  the  ancient  Hebrew  had  no 
punctuation !  But  here  the  modern  Jew,  the  infidel,  and 
the  destructive  higher  critic  plant  themselves  together. 
As,  however,  this  matter  of  punctuation  comes  up  again 
when  this  discussion  reaches  the  several  theories  of  in- 
terpretation, it  is  dismissed  for  the  present,  that  we  may 
proceed  with  the  exposition. 

For  the  better  understanding  of  this  remarkable  answer 
to  Daniel's  prayer  we  need  a  new  outline  and  a  special 
analysis.  It  cannot  escape  notice  that  the  24th  verse  of 
the  chapter,  the  first  verse  of  the  prophecy,  treats  of  the 
70  weeks  as  a  whole,  enumerating,  in  a  general  but  strictly 
orderly  way,  the  things  to  be  accomplished  in  the  period, 
while  in  the  other  three  verses  the  70  weeks  are  first 
separated  into  three  unequal  subdivisions,  namely,  7  weeks, 
62  weeks  and  one  week,  with  the  assignment  to  each 
of  its  appropriate  events,  and,  second,  the  one  week  is 
divided  into  two  equal  parts,  making  the  middle  of  the 
last  week  the  climax  of  the  prophecy. 

Nor  can  it  escape  notice  that  the  prophecy  throughout 
is  designedly  marked  with  order,  precision  and  definite- 


NINTH  CHAPTER  OF  DANIEL  117 

ness  of  statement  on  all  points  of  chronology  and  fact. 
In  any  sensible  analysis,  which  combines  the  general  and 
particular  statements  of  the  prophecy,  it  is  evident  that 
all  the  great  events  specified  in  verse  24,  must,  as  to 
order,  be  assigned  to  the  climax,  the  middle  of  the  last 
week.  As  covering,  therefore,  the  whole  ground  and 
properly  correlating  the  several  parts  is  now  submitted 
the  following 

EXEGETICAL  ANALYSIS  OF  DaNIEL   9  :  24-27 

I.  God's  great  decree  concerning  the  Jews. 

II.  Meaning,  or  duration,  of  the  seventy  weeks. 

III.  When  they  begin,  or  terminus  a  quo. 

IV.  Sixty-two  weeks,  or  434  years,  with  the  preceding 
49  years,  making  483  years  to  the  coming  of  Messiah,  the 
King. 

V.  The  seven  weeks,  or  49  years,  rebuilding  Jeru- 
salem. 

VI.  One  week,  or  seven  years,  as  a  whole,  proclaim- 
ing the  New  Covenant  (Jer.  31 :  31-34)  and  confirming  it 
with  many  Jews. 

VII.  One  week,  or  seven  years,  divided  in  the  middle. 

I.     The  First  Half— 

(i)  Confirming  the  New  Covenant  with  many  Jews 
for  three  and  one-half  years. 

(2)  Finishing  the  transgression  (Matt.  23:35). 

(3)  Messiah  cut  off  by  His  people,  and  His  people  cut 
oflf  by  Messiah  for  a  long  time. 

(4)  Making  an  end  of  sin. 

(5)  Making  reconciliation  for  iniquity. 

(6)  Bringing  in  everlasting  righteousness. 

(7)  Sealing  up  vision  and  prophecy. 


118  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

(8)  Causing  sacrifice  and  oblation  to  cease,  or  the  re- 
jecting of  the  old,  typical  temple  and  covenant  (Matt. 
27:  51 ;  Col.  2:  14-17;  Heb.  7  to  10). 

(9)  Anointing  the  Most  Holy,  or  the  consecration  of 
the  New,  antitypical  Temple  (Acts  2). 

2.     The  Second  Half — 

Confirming  the  New  Covenant  with  many  Jews  for 
three  and  one-half  years  more,  i.e.,  up  to  the  times  of  the 
Gentiles,  which  is  the  terminus  ad  quern. 

Vni.  After  the  70  weeks  (i)  The  coming  prince — 
Titus.  (2)  The  Abomination  of  Desolation.  (3)  De- 
struction of  the  city  and  sanctuary  as  with  a  flood.  (4) 
The  flood  of  wrath  on  the  Jewish  people  till  the  fullness 
of  the  Gentiles. 

QUESTIONS 

1.  What  the  importance  of  the  9th  chapter  of  Daniel? 

2.  What  the  first  and  simplest  outhne  of  it? 

3.  What  the  date  of  Daniel's  prayer? 

4.  What,  in  general,  the  occasion  and  what  is  the  meaning 
of  "the  books"  in  9:  22. 

5.  What  the  constituent  elements  of  the  occasion  of  this 
prayer  ? 

6.  Discuss  Jeremiah's  seventy  years. 

7.  Discuss  the  Levitical  law  of  the  Land  Sabbath  and  its  rela- 
tion to  this  period. 

8.  Discuss  the  curse  and  oath  of  Moses  relating  to  this  prayer. 

9.  Discuss  the  atonement  as  it  relates  to  this  prayer. 

10.  Discuss  Daniel's  previous  visions  as  they  relate  to  this 
prayer. 

11.  What  the  contents  of  the  prayer?     Discuss  each  item. 

12.  What  the  three  elements  that  constitute  the  character  of 
the  answer  to  this  prayer? 

13.  Cite  four  English  versions  and  their  variant  punctuation 
of  Dan.  9:  25  and  state  the  effect  on  the  exegesis. 

14.  What  the  notable  things  of  this  prophecy  (9:24-27)? 

15.  Give  the  critical  (exegetical)  analysis  of  the  prophetic 
part  of  this  chapter  (9:24-27). 


THE    MARVELOUS    NINTH    CHAPTER    OF 
DANIEL  (Continued) 

Scripture:  Dan.  9: 1-27 

IN  this  chapter  we  consider  seriatim  the  items  of  the 
exegetical  analysis  already  submitted : 
I.  God's  Great  Decree  Concerning  the  Jewish  Na- 
tion.— This  decree  is  the  whole  prophecy,  and  by  its 
terms  has  all  the  force  of  an  inexorable  judicial  decision. 
It  covers  such  a  long  period  of  time,  subdivided  into  such 
particular  sections,  each  to  be  filled  with  its  own  appro- 
priate events,  these  events  of  such  number,  magnitude, 
order  and  correlation,  the  parts  assigned  to  particular 
nations  so  extraordinary  as  to  defy  the  inventive  audacity 
of  an  impostor.  On  its  face  are  registered  the  marks 
of  its  divine  origin.  As  a  phenomenon  it  is  easier  to 
philosophically  account  for  it  as  a  prophecy  written  by 
Daniel  at  the  time  and  under  the  circumstance  claimed, 
than  to  stagger  credulity  by  attributing  it  to  an  impostor 
of  the  Maccabean  days.  An  attribution  of  this  prophecy 
to  a  pseudo-Daniel  of  the  second  century  before  Christ 
necessitates  an  incredible  miracle. 

II.  Meaning  or  Duration  of  the  Seventy  Weeks. — 
This  means  seventy  weeks  of  years,  a  symbolism  already 
familiar  to  the  Jewish  mind,  as  it  afterwards  became  to 
both  Greek  and  Latin  philosophers.  It  is  weeks  of  years, 
not  days.  Laban  said  to  Jacob,  "Fulfill  her  week  also," 
meaning  seven  years,  and  through  Daniel's  contemporary, 

119 


120  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

Ezekiel,  Jehovah  had  already  made  plain  the  symbol  of 
a  day  for  a  year  in  Jewish  probation :  "I  have  laid  upon 
thee  the  years  of  their  iniquity,  according  to  the  number 
of  the  days"  (Ezek.  4:5).  Moreover,  the  whole  period, 
490  years,  had  twice  before  in  Jewish  history  set  bounds 
to  national  probation,  viz. :  490  years  from  the  entrance 
into  Canaan  to  the  beginning  of  the  monarchy  under  Saul, 
and  490  years  from  the  beginning  of  the  monarchy  to 
its  downfall  in  the  servitude  of  Babylon.  So  this  proph- 
ecy, on  the  principle  of  correspondence  to  the  past, 
assigns  another  probation  of  490  years.  Indeed,  there 
has  never  been  any  ambiguity  about  the  meaning  of  the 
seventy  weeks.  However  much  infidel,  modern  Jew, 
higher  critic  or  orthodox  interpreter  may  differ  about 
other  matters  in  the  prophecy,  all  agree  that  seventy 
weeks  means  490  years.  Indeed,  it  could  not  mean  sev- 
enty weeks  of  days — only  a  fraction  over  one  year,  which 
would  not  suffice  for  the  one  event  of  rebuilding  Jerusa- 
lem, so  we  may  rest  content  in  the  assurance  that  God 
had  determined  another  probation  of  490  years  for  His 
people. 

At  this  point  in  the  exposition  we  may  well  pause  to 
inquire:  What,  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  must  be  the 
interpretation  that  will  satisfy  the  terms  of  this  prophecy? 
Entirely  apart  from  the  less  important  questions  of  chro- 
nology, i.  e.,  questions  of  date  marking  the  beginning 
and  end  of  the  period,  we  must  insist  that  the  body  of 
the  prophecy — its  extraordinary  matter — must,  in  all  its 
great  particulars,  be  identified  in  fulfillment  before  the 
interpretation  can  be  accepted.  This  insistence  arises 
from  two  considerations:  (i)  without  undervaluing  the 
terminal  elements,  it  must  be  conceded  that  the  things  to 
be  accomplished  are  more  vital  than  the  time  when  they 
commence  or  end;    (2)  our  viewpoint,  2,500  years  after 


NINTH  CHAPTER  OF  DANIEL  121 

the  delivery  of  the  prophecy,  and  necessarily  after  its 
fulfillment,  if  it  be  prophecy. 

It  is  a  characteristic  of  prophecy  to  both  veil  and 
reveal.  Its  terms  are  not  those  of  accomplished  history, 
and  there  is  room  for  difiference  of  opinion  about  the 
time  when  the  matter  is  to  be  fulfilled  before  this  fulfill- 
ment comes,  as  is  evident  from  the  history  of  all  previous 
prophecies.  But  there  is  a  law  which  finally  determines 
the  genuineness  of  the  prophetic  element,  that  is,  it  must 
be  fulfilled.  A  prophecy  that  does  not  come  to  pass  is 
no  prophecy.  This  is  the  definite  test.  We  therefore  are 
acting  strictly  within  the  rules  governing  prophecy  when 
from  our  late  standpoint  we  seek  in  the  history  of  the 
past  for  historical  facts  verifying  the  fulfillment  of  what 
is  here  foretold.  Hence  we  would  be  perfectly  justified 
in  rejecting  any  interpretation  as  a  reasonable  exegesis 
of  this  prophecy  which  left  out  the  great  matters  set 
forth  in  the  24th  verse,  which  is  a  summary  of  the 
greater  events  of  the  period.  And  what  are  the  items 
of  this  summary?  We  must  find  a  rounded  and  con- 
nected period  of  490  years.  In  this  period  must  be 
located  the  rebuilding  of  the  city  of  Jerusalem,  the  finish- 
ing of  the  transgression  of  the  Jewish  people,  the  making 
an  end  of  sin,  the  making  reconciliation  for  iniquity,  the 
bringing  in  of  everlasting  righteousness,  the  sealing  up 
of  vision  and  prophecy  and  the  anointing  of  a  Most  Holy. 
These  are  all  extraordinary  events.  It  was  one  of  the 
matters  that  gravely  troubled  Daniel,  as  evidenced  by 
his  prayer,  that  the  transgression  of  his  people  had  been 
continuous  from  the  beginning  of  their  history  to  his  time. 
He  was  not  alone  disturbed  by  the  ofifenses  immediately 
preceding  the  servitude  to  Babylon,  but  on  his  conscience 
was  an  unbroken  series  of  transgressions  under  Moses, 
under  the  judges,  under  the  kings,  against  the  law  and 


122  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

against  the  messages  of  the  prophets.  There  must  be, 
in  any  correct  interpretation,  a  filHng  up  of  the  measure, 
or  a  finishing  of  the  transgression  of  the  Jewish  people. 
Moreover,  up  to  his  time  no  end  to  sins  had  been  made 
by  atonement.  They  were  merely  passed  over  through 
typical  animal  sacrifices.  Yet  again,  this  end  of  sins,  not 
in  figure,  but  in  fact,  must  be  brought  about  by  a  real 
reconciliation  for  iniquity,  i.  e.,  a  genuine  and  permanent 
atonement.  Following  this  necessarily  would  be  brought 
in  an  everlasting  righteousness.  Not  a  tattered  patch- 
work, such  as  the  best  of  their  worthies  in  ancient  times 
offered  in  their  lives,  but  a  righteousness  whiter  than 
snow  and  so  flawless  that  not  even  the  omniscience  of 
God  when  holding  it  in  the  light  of  immaculate  holiness 
could  find  a  spot  on  it — a  righteousness  that  would 
envelop  its  subject  soul  and  body  and  would  be  imper- 
vious to  the  thrust  or  stroke  of  the  flaming  sword  of 
divine  justice.  Moreover,  a  just  interpretation  would 
demand  the  coming  of  a  Person  on  whom  all  the  rays  of 
past  prophecy  would  focus,  so  that  it  could  be  said  that 
up  to  this  date  "were  the  law  and  the  prophets"  and 
since  that  time  a  new  order  of  things.  Moreover,  as  the 
prophecy  foretells  the  total  abrogation  of  sacrifices  and 
ofTerings,  the  interpretation  must  find  not  some  tem- 
porary cessation  of  these  offerings  but  a  decree  of  final 
annulment,  so  that  an  end  is  made  to  them  forever.  Yet 
again,  as  the  prophecy  foretells  the  destruction  of  the 
city  and  sanctuary  and  the  rejection  of  the  people,  any 
thorough  interpretation  must  find  the  incoming  of  a  new 
covenant,  the  anointing  of  a  new  Most  Holy  Place  and  a 
new  and  spiritual  Israel. 

All  controversies  about  the  terminus  a  quo  and  the  ter- 
minus ad  quern  are  mere  by-plays,  unless  within  these 
terminals  can  be  shown  fulfillment  of  the  great  particu- 


NINTH  CHAPTER  OF  DANIEL  123 

lars  of  the  prophecy.  That  man's  views  of  the  beginning 
of  the  period  or  of  the  end  of  it  are  lighter  than  air 
unless  within  his  terminal  points  he  can  show  the  fulfill- 
ment of  the  great  events  which  are  to  his  terminal  points 
as  the  building  is  to  the  scaffolding.  Not  only  must  the 
true  interpretation  find  all  of  the  great  particulars  of  the 
summary  in  the  24th  verse,  but  it  must  find  the  par- 
ticular things  for  the  subdivision  of  the  period,  some- 
thing definite  to  occur  in  forty-nine  years,  and  some- 
thing more  important  434  years  later,  and  again  a  con- 
tinuous event  for  seven  years,  and  yet  again  the  remark- 
able particulars  of  each  half  of  the  seven  years  when 
divided  in  the  middle.  And  as  the  prophecy  foretells  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  the  sanctuary  some  time 
after  the  seventy  weeks,  or  490  years,  and  then  a  long 
period  of  wrath  upon  the  rejected  people,  the  true  inter- 
pretation must  find  a  binding  relation  between  this  doom 
and  the  cutting  off  of  the  Anointed  One  in  the  last  seven 
years  of  the  period.  This  must  be  the  relation  of  cause 
and  effect.  The  destruction  of  the  city  and  sanctuary 
and  rejection  of  the  people  must  be  the  result  of  the 
cutting  off.  If  an  interpreter  be  unprepared  to  show 
such  fulfillment,  then  he  ought  to  refrain  from  attempt- 
ing any  exposition  of  the  passage.  Yet  again,  two  per- 
sons at  least,  neither  of  them  human,  must  have  known 
about  the  facts  and  the  dates  set  forth  in  the  prophecy. 
These  two  persons  are  the  Angel  Gabriel,  who  brought 
the  prophecy  to  Daniel,  and  the  God  of  heaven,  who  sent 
it  as  an  answer  to  Daniel's  prayer.  Their  testimony  as 
to  the  fulfillment  would  be  intensely  valuable.  An  inter- 
pretation not  corroborated  by  the  testimony  of  Gabriel 
or  of  God,  the  Father,  who  sent  the  prophecy,  could  not 
stand  by  mere  human  argumentation. 

One  more  point  in  this  connection:    It  is  not  denied 


124  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

that  this  book  and,  particularly,  this  prophecy,  exercised 
a  marvelous  influence  on  the  subsequent  periods  of  Jew- 
ish history.  Some  definite  impression  was  created  by  its 
language,  and  this  impression  would  naturally  take  the 
shape  of  expectation.  We  ought  to  be  able  to  find,  there- 
fore, a  widespread  expectation  of  fulfillment,  generated 
by  the  prophecy  itself,  in  the  day  of  its  fulfillment,  or 
in  the  near  time  preceding  its  fulfillment.  The  people 
generally,  without  any  claims  to  special  scholarship, 
would  receive  impressions,  ripening  into  expectation, 
from  the  prophecy's  definite  time  revelation.  A  date  of 
fulfillment,  therefore,  without  antecedent  expectations, 
would  hardly  meet  the  conditions  of  this  prophecy. 

III.  When  the  Seventy  Weeks  Began,  or  the  Termi- 
nus a  Quo. — The  beginning  is  thus  expressed  in  the  text: 
"Know  therefore  and  discern,  that  from  the  going  forth 
of  the  commandment  to  restore  and  build  Jerusalem  unto 
the  Anointed  One,  the  Prince,  shall  be  seven  weeks,  and 
three  score  and  two  weeks;  it  shall  be  built  again  with 
street  and  moat,  even  in  troublous  times."  Here  begins 
the  subdivision  of  the  seventy  weeks,  with  appropriate 
events  assigned  to  each  section,  namely,  seven  weeks, 
sixty-two  weeks,  one  week;  and  just  here  comes  the 
battle  on  punctuation  which  determines  the  exegesis. 
According  to  the  radical  higher  critics,  whom  the  Canter- 
bury revision,  after  much  debate,  consented  to  follow, 
the  punctuation  is  as  follows :  "Know  therefore  and  dis- 
cern, that  from  the  going  forth  of  the  commandment  to 
restore  and  build  Jerusalem  unto  the  Anointed  One,  the 
Prince,  shall  be  seven  weeks ;  and  three  score  and  two 
weeks,  it  shall  be  built  again,  with  street  and  moat,  even 
in  troublous  times."  This  punctuation  assigns  the  first 
subdivision  of  forty-nine  years  to  the  coming  of  the 
Anointed  One,  the  Prince.    And  the  second  subdivision, 


NINTH  CHAPTER  OF  DANIEL  125 

the  three  score  and  two  weeks,  or  434  years,  to  the  build- 
ing of  the  city,  and  logically  necessitates  that  the  Anointed 
One,  who  comes  at  the  end  of  the  forty-nine  years,  shall 
live  434  years  through  all  the  second  subdivision,  and 
afterwards  be  cut  off.  Here  are  two  unspeakable  absurd- 
ities that  not  even  the  pseudo-Daniel  would  perpetrate: 
(i)  That  434  years  are  required  for  building  Jerusalem, 
and  (2)  that  the  Anointed  One  is  434  years  old  before  he 
is  cut  off.  No  man  in  Maccabean  times,  one  degree 
removed  from  idiocy,  would  have  made  either  statement. 
It  is  a  mere  expedient  to  say  that  the  Anointed  One  of 
verse  26  must  be  a  different  person  from  the  Anointed 
One  of  verse  25.  There  is  absolutely  no  warrant  in  the 
text  for  making  the  Anointed  One  who  is  cut  off  a 
different  person  from  the  Anointed  One  who  comes.  A 
very  few  words  only  intervene,  and  no  break  in  the 
sense  or  connection  between  the  Anointed  One  in  verse 
25  and  the  Anointed  One  in  verse  26.  The  Anointed 
One  who  comes  is  the  Anointed  One  who  is  cut  off.  But 
what  is  served  by  this  punctuation-murder?  It  seems 
to  be  an  effort  to  make  the  Anointed  One  in  verse  25 
mean  Cyrus,  and  to  fix  the  beginning  of  the  434  years 
just  forty-nine  years  before  the  coming  of  Cyrus,  which 
of  course  requires  the  finding  of  some  one  to  serve  for 
another  Anointed  One.  True,  indeed,  in  Isaiah  45:1, 
176  years  before  his  time,  Cyrus  is  called  an  anointed 
one,  but  the  trouble  with  the  punctuation  is  to  find  a 
commandment  to  restore  and  build  Jerusalem  just  forty- 
nine  years  before  Cyrus,  whose  first  year  is  b.  c.  536, 
and  then  to  find  another  anointed  one  who  is  cut  off  just 
434  years  plus  3^/3  years  later,  i.  e.,  in  b.  c.  98  or  99, 
In  other  words,  this  absurd  punctuation  puts  both  ends 
of  the  490  years  out  in  the  air  with  nothing  to  mark  its 
coming  or  exit.     Don't  misunderstand  me.     T  am  not 


126  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

ignorant  of  the  various  expedients  of  the  radical  critics 
in  dealing  with  the  prophecy  of  Daniel,  but  have  studied 
profoundly  in  many  books  their  attempts  at  its  exposi- 
tion. It  would  be  impossible  to  generalize  their  conten- 
tions, since  they  are  as  variant  as  the  number  of  critics, 
but  doubtless  the  best  and  strongest  that  can  be  said  on 
their  part  is  to  be  found  in  Dr.  Driver's  Commentary  on 
Daniel  in  the  Cambridge  Bible.  In  order  to  be  as  fair  to 
him  as  a  brief  statement  will  permit,  I  will  here  sum- 
marize his  interpretation  of  the  matter  in  hand : 

(i)  He  proceeds  upon  the  theory  that  the  book  of 
Daniel  was  written  by  some  unknown  person  in  the 
Maccabean  days  in  some  part  of  the  second  century 
before  Christ,  and  that  the  book  was  written  from  the 
standpoint  of  history,  shaped  in  prophetic  form  and 
attributed  to  Daniel. 

(2)  That  the  490  years  corrects,  interprets  and  para- 
phrases Jeremiah's  seventy  years.  In  other  words,  that 
Jeremiah's  seventy  years  are  explained  to  Daniel  as 
meaning  weeks  of  years,  that  is  to  say,  that  the  seventy 
weeks  must  commence  with  Jeremiah's  seventy  years. 

(3)  His  terminus  a  quo  is  Jeremiah  30:  18,  which  con- 
tains a  promise  to  rebuild  Jerusalem,  which  he  dates, 
probably,  b.  c.  458. 

(4)  That  it  is  only  forty-nine  years  later,  b.  c.  538, 
until  Cyrus  conquered  Babylon,  and  therefore  he  is  the 
anointed  one,  the  prince  of  verse  24. 

(5)  That  sixty-two  weeks,  or  434  years,  are  devoted 
to  rebuilding  the  city. 

(6)  The  anointed  one  of  verse  26  is  Onias,  the  high 
priest,  who,  in  the  apocryphal  book,  II  Maccabees,  is 
said  to  have  been  assassinated. 

(7)  That  the  coming  prince  of  verse  26  is  Antiochus 
Epiphanes,  who  in  the  period  of  seven  years  sets  up  the 


NINTH  CHAPTER  OF  DANIEL  127 

Abomination  of  Desolation,  takes  away  the  daily  sacri- 
fice and  confirms  a  covenant  with  many  Jews. 

Dr.  Driver  frankly  admits  that  the  time  of  Onias  and 
Antiochus  falls  sixty-seven  years  short  of  the  prescribed 
date  in  the  prophecy.  Nor  does  he  explain  how  a  writer 
of  that  very  time,  and  who  is  simply  shaping  historical 
fact  in  a  prophetic  form,  should  have  made  such  an  awful 
mistake  in  the  length  of  time.  We  might  be  willing  to 
accept  his  probable  date  of  prophecy  in  Jeremiah  30: 18, 
but  must  object  to  his  making  the  fifty-two  years  before 
Cyrus  niean  forty-nine  years,  and  we  find  it  impossible 
to  accept  his  434  years  as  devoted  to  the  building  of  the 
city  and  his  trying  to  make  the  time  of  Onias  and  Anti- 
ochus fit  the  end  of  the  period.  Moreover,  it  is  impos- 
sible to  find  in  the  period  of  Antiochus  any  expec- 
tation of  the  Coming  One  warranted  by  this  and 
many  other  prophecies.  Nor  do  we  find  the  tem- 
porary interruption  of  the  sacrifices  by  Antiochus  at 
all  equal  to  the  total  abrogation  implied  in  the  terms  of 
this  prophecy.  Indeed,  no  one  of  the  great  particulars 
of  the  summary  in  the  24th  verse  can  be  identified  in 
the  days  of  Antiochus.  Not  only  does  his  exposition  put 
both  terminal  points  in  the  air,  without  mark  of  beginnmg 
or  exit,  but  it  furnishes  no  body  of  great  extraordinary 
events  to  fill  in  between  the  dates. 

I  thought  it  needful  to  call  attention  to  this  higher 
critic  method  of  dealing  with  Daniel,  but  for  ourselves 
we  feel  constrained  to  seek  an  interpretation  more  accord- 
ant with  the  terms  of  the  prophecy.  The  text  demands 
as  a  starting  point,  the  going  forth  of  a  commandment 
to  restore  and  build  Jerusalem.  The  context  clearly 
shows  that  the  restoration  here  expressed  is  the  restora- 
tion from  the  destruction  accomplished  by  Nebuchadnez- 
zar (b.  c.  605). 


128  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

"The  commandment"  cannot  mean  a  divine  decree, 
because  we  have  no  means  of  dating  God's  purposes. 
"The  going  forth"  of  the  commandment  cannot  refer  to 
a  mere  prediction  of  the  restoration  and  rebuilding,  for 
a  prediction  is  not  a  commandment.  It  is  true  Dr.  Driver 
so  styles  Jeremiah's  prediction  (30:  18)  :  "Behold,  I  will 
turn  again  the  captivity  of  Jacob's  tents  and  have  com- 
passion on  his  dwelling  places ;  and  the  city  shall  be 
builded  up,  her  heap,  and  the  palace  shall  remain  after 
the  manner  thereof."  But  his  is  less  definite  than  the 
prediction  in  Isaiah  44:28:  "That  saith  of  Cyrus,  he  is 
my  shepherd,  and  shall  perform  all  my  pleasure :  even 
saying  of  Jerusalem,  she  shall  be  built ;  and  to  the  temple 
thy  foundation  shall  be  laid."  Both  of  these  predic- 
tions are  pertinent  to  the  matter  in  hand,  and  equally 
show  that  God's  purpose  is  the  divine  original  of  the 
commandment  whenever  and  by  whomsoever  sent  forth. 
But  Isaiah's  prediction  (b.  c.  712)  precedes  even  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  more  than  one  hundred 
years. 

On  this  point  Dr.  Pusey  well  says,  "The  decree  spoken 
of  was  doubtless  meant  of  a  decree  of  God,  but  to  be 
made  known  through  His  instrument,  man,  who  was  to 
effectuate  it.  The  commandment  went  forth  from  God, 
like  that,  at  which,  Gabriel  had  just  said,  using  the  same 
idiom,  he  himself  came  forth  to  Daniel.  But  as  the  one 
was  fulfilled  through  Gabriel,  so  the  other  remained  to 
be  fulfilled  through  the  Persian  monarch,  in  whose  hands 
God  had  left  for  the  time  the  outward  disposal  of  His 
people." 

When,  therefore,  we  look  for  "the  going  forth  of  a 
commandment"  of  a  Persian  monarch  we  find  four 
recorded  in  the  Bible  as  follows: 

I.  The  Decree  of  Cyrus  (fulfilling  Isa.  44:28),  and 


NINTH  CHAPTER  OF  DANIEL  129 

recorded  in  II  Chron.  36:22,  23;  Ezra  i:  1-2,  a  copy  of 
which  was  found  later  among  the  archives  by  Darius 
Hystaspes  (Ezra  6:2-'5).  The  date  of  this  decree  was 
B.  c.  536.  The  prediction  in  Isaiah  would  lead  us  to 
expect  some  reference  to  the  building  of  Jerusalem,  but 
all  the  records  of  it  limit  it  to  the  building  of  the  temple. 

2.  The  Decree  of  Darius  Hystaspes  (Ezra  6),  reviving 
the  decree  of  Cyrus,  which  had  been  frustrated  by  the 
enemies  of  the  Jews  and  annulled  by  the  Artaxerxes, 
who  was  the  pseudo-Smerdis  (Ezra  4).  The  date  of  this 
decree  is  b.  c.  519.  But  the  record  limits  it  also  to  the 
rebuilding  of  the  temple,  which  was  accomplished  in 
the  sixth  year  of  Darius. 

3.  The  first  Decree  of  Artaxerxes  Longimanus  (Ezra 
7).  The  date  of  this  decree  was  the  seventh  year  of 
Artaxerxes,  b.  c.  457.  The  record  shows  here  an  enlarge- 
ment of  powers  much  beyond  the  former  decrees.  This 
decree  has  nothing  to  say  of  building  the  temple  (already 
accomplished)  but  of  beautifying  it,  nor  in  itself,  as 
recorded,  any  reference  to  building  the  city,  yet  in 
another  place  this  latter  is  evidently  a  part  of  Ezra's 
work,  but  confers  on  Ezra  extraordinary  powers  in 
restoring  the  Jewish  polity,  both  civic  and  ecclesiastical, 
according  to  the  law  of  Moses. 

4.  The  Second  Decree  of  Artaxerxes  Longimanus 
(Neh.  I  and  2).  The  date  of  this  decree  is  the  twentieth 
year  of  Artaxerxes,  b.  c.  445.  The  terms  of  this  decree 
are  express  in  their  reference  to  building  Jerusalem. 

Now  as  a  starting  point  for  the  beginning  of  the  490 
years,  we  are  shut  up  to  the  acceptance  of  one  of  these 
four  decrees.  And  candor  compels  the  concession  that 
a  priori  any  one  of  the  four  meets  the  requirements  of 
the  terms  of  the  prophecy. 

While  the  record  of  the  Cyrus  decree  seems  limited  to 


130  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

the  rebuilding  of  the  temple,  the  Isaiah  prophecy  (44: 28) 
demands  the  inclusion  of  the  building  of  the  city.  Espe- 
cially must  this  be  conceded  when  we  read  the  letter 
sent  to  Artaxerxes,  or  the  pseudo-Smerdis,  by  the  ene- 
mies of  the  Jews  (See  Ezra  4:  11-14).  And  as  Darius 
Hystaspes,  the  author  of  the  second  decree,  distinctly 
revived  and  ratified  the  Cyrus  decree,  which  had  been 
frustrated,  this,  too,  would  include  the  building  of  the 
city. 

For  the  third  decree,  the  evidence  is  stronger  still,  the 
one  issued  to  Ezra  by  Artaxerxes  Longimanus,  b.  c.  457. 
This  restores  Jerusalem  to  a  civil  polity  under  their  own 
laws  and  included  the  country  west  of  the  river  (Ezra 
7:25).  There  are  two  ideas  in  the  prophecy,  "to  restore 
and  to  build,"  and  restoration  is  more  important  than 
rebuilding. 

The  restoration  of  the  civil  polity  was  a  necessary 
preliminary  to  the  entrance  of  the  people  on  their  new 
probation  of  490  years.  Without  it  they  could  not  be 
responsible.  They  must  be  under  their  own  judges  and 
magistrates,  with  powers  of  imprisonment,  confiscation, 
banishment  and  death,  and  charged  with  the  administra- 
tion of  their  own  Mosaic  law,  in  order  to  enter  upon  this 
probation  or  responsibility.  This  restoration  was  more 
essential  than  the  building  of  the  walls  of  the  city,  since 
it  conferred  a  political  status,  while  the  walls  only  con- 
ferred a  defense. 

The  fourth  decree  (Neh.  i  and  2),  B.C.  445,  only  car- 
ries on  the  third  as  the  second  carried  on  the  first.  That 
is  to  say,  if  Artaxerxes  Longimanus  confers  restoration 
on  Jerusalem,  in  its  civil  polity,  in  his  first  decree,  it 
was  but  a  logical  outcome  that  the  city  must  have  walls 
to  protect  its  status  from  the  encroachment  of  its  bitter 
enemies.    Those  490  years  of  probation  are  determined 


NINTH  CHAPTER  OF  DANIEL  131 

on  both  the  people  and  on  the  city.  It  does  not  seem  that 
a  just  probation  could  commence  until  the  restoration  of 
their  civil  polity,  under  their  own  magistrates  and  judges, 
charged  with  the  administration  of  their  own  Mosaic  law 
and  empowered  to  enforce  it  with  penalties  of  confisca- 
tion, imprisonment,  banishment  and  death.  These  powers 
came  with  the  restoration  of  the  city  under  Ezra,  and 
arose  from  a  commandment  going  forth  from  Artaxerxes 
Longimanus,  b.  c.  457. 

Moreover,  it  is  certain,  from  Ezra  6 :  14,  that  the 
obstructions  to  the  building,  general  and  special,  con- 
tinued to  the  time  of  Artaxerxes  Longimanus,  and  were 
removed  at  his  commandment.  This  building  was  not 
limited  to  the  temple,  for  that  was  finished  in  the  sixth 
year  of  Darius.  The  Artaxerxes  of  6 :  14  is  Longimanus, 
who  followed  Darius,  and  not  the  Artaxerxes  of  Ezra 
4 : 7-24,  who  preceded  Darius  and  was  Gaumata,  the 
pseudo-Smerdis.  This  passage  (6:14)  directly  connects 
Ezra  with  both  restoration  and  building,  and  confers  on 
this  third  decree  additional  probability  as  the  one  of  the 
four  which  best  meets  the  terms  of  the  prophecy.  But 
if  any  one  of  the  four  might  reasonably  meet  the  terms 
of  the  prophecy,  we  are  justified  in  allowing  the  fulfill- 
ment to  designate  which  one  was  intended.  This  is  the 
final  and  critical  test  of  prophecy  (Deut.  18:21,22).  We 
have  therefore,  from  our  viewpoint  of  2,500  years  after 
the  prophecy,  only  to  apply  the  dates  of  these  four  de- 
crees, in  order  to  arrive  at  the  coming  of 

IV.  Messiah,  the  Prince. — To  the  decree  of  Cyrus, 
B.  c.  536,  we  add  the  seven  weeks  and  sixty-two  weeks, 
or  483  years,  and  it  brings  us  to  b.  c.  53,  and  no  "Messiah 
the  Prince"  in  evidence.  This  might  naturally  be  ex- 
pected, since  the  Cyrus  decree  was  expressly  annulled 
by  Artaxerxes  who  was  Gaumata,  the  pseudo-Smerdis 


132  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

(Ezra  4:17-24),  and  permission  to  build  the  city  ex- 
pressly withheld  until  new  commandment  is  ordered. 

To  the  Darius  decree,  B.C.  519  (which  renewed  the 
order  of  Cyrus  to  build  the  temple),  we  add  the  483 
years,  and  it  brings  us  to  b.  c.  36,  with  no  "Messiah,  the 
Prince,"  in  evidence,  because  this  decree  does  not  re- 
store civil  polity,  so  necessary  to  probation. 

To  the  first  decree  of  Artaxerxes  Longimanus,  b.  c. 
457,  which  dowered  Ezra  with  such  extraordinary  powers 
(Ezra  7:25,26),  including  commandment  to  build  the 
city  (Ezra  6:14),  we  add  the  483  years  and  it  brings 
us  to  the  remarkable  scene  at  the  baptism  of  Jesus,  when 
he  was  anointed  as  Prophet,  Sacrifice,  Priest  and  King 
by  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  was  witnessed  by  the  voice  of  the 
Father  from  heaven :  "This  is  my  beloved  Son,  in  whom 
I  am  well  pleased."  By  this  anointing,  John  the  Baptist 
recognizes  the  Messiah,  and  himself  witnesses:  "Be- 
hold the  Lamb  of  God  who  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the 
world !"  He  is  the  Messiah  that  himself  so  remarkably 
verifies  this  very  prophecy  of  Daniel  (Matt.  24:15). 
His  is  the  one  who  so  many  times  assumes  the  Daniel 
title,  "Son  of  Man,"  whose  life  and  words  and  death  so 
amazingly  expound  this  prophecy.  It  was  Gabriel  who 
carried  the  revelation  of  the  Messiah  to  Daniel,  and  it 
was  this  very  Gabriel  and  other  angels  who  so  remark- 
ably identified  this  Jesus  as  the  Messiah  (Luke  i :  17-19, 
26-38;  Matt.  1:18-22;  Luke  2:8-15;  Matt.  2:13-14). 
It  was  God  the  Father  who  sent  Gabriel  to  carry  the 
revelation  of  the  Messiah  to  Daniel,  and  it  was  the 
Father  who  three  times  from  the  most  excellent  glory 
identified  Him  when  He  came. 

We  may  therefore  feel  assured  that  we  find  the  ter- 
minus a  quo,  or  beginning  of  the  490  years,  in  the  going 
forth  of  the  commandment  of  Artaxerxes  Longimanus, 


NINTH  CHAPTER  OF  DANIEL  133 

B.  c.  457.  And  what  kind  of  Messiah  does  Dr.  Driver 
find  483  years  from  his  terminus  a  quo?  None  what- 
ever, by  his  own  confession.  But  allow  him  to  arbitrarily 
strike  off  seventy  years  of  his  time,  and  then  who? 
Onias,  a  high  priest,  whose  cutting  off  is  unknown  to 
history,  except  in  an  apocryphal  book  whose  testimony 
on  this  point  is  flatly  contradicted  by  Josephus. 

When  we  come  to  apply  the  fourth  decree  (Neh.  i 
and  2)  we  have  two  notable  explanations: 

First,  Sir  Robert  Anderson,  who  has  two  remarkable 
books  on  Daniel,  "The  Coming  Prince"  and  "Daniel  in 
the  Critics'  Den,"  and  who  accepts  the  usual  date  b.  c. 
445,  insists  that  the  Jews  reckoned  by  lunar  years  of 
360  days,  instead  of  365 jJ4-  In  this  way,  by  a  very  pre- 
cise calculation,  he  adds  483  years  of  360  days  each  to 
B.  c.  445,  which  culminates  on  the  very  Palm  Sunday 
when  Jesus  makes  His  triumphant  entry  into  Jerusalem 
and  is  publicly  received  as  Messiah  the  King.  Sir  Robert 
Anderson's  argument  is  strong,  and  particularly  his 
chronological  arrangement  evinces  profound  knowledge 
and  skill.  In  many  respects  his  review  of  Farrar  and 
Driver  surpasses  in  excellence  any  other  contribution 
towards  the  defense  of  the  book  of  Daniel  from  the 
assaults  of  destructive  criticism. 

Second,  Hengstenberg,  on  the  other  hand,  while  agree- 
ing with  Sir  Robert  Anderson  in  making  the  Nehemiah 
decree  the  terminus  a  quo  of  the  490  years,  controverts 
the  theory  of  a  year  of  360  days,  and  contests  the  date 
usually  accepted,  B.C.  445.  By  an  elaborate  historical 
argument  of  great  plausibility  he  seeks  to  prove  that  the 
twentieth  year  of  Artaxerxes  Longimanus  falls  upon  the 
date  B.C.  455,  and  then  by  adding  the  483  years  he 
reaches  his  acknowledgment  by  the  Father  as  the  true 
coming  of  Messiah,  the  Prince.    Dr.  Hengstenberg's  dis- 


134  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

sertation  on  Daniel  and  his  treatment  of  the  Messianic 
elements  of  Daniel's  book  in  his  great  work,  "The  Christ- 
ology  of  the  Old  Testament,"  are  indispensable  to  the 
student  of  the  book  of  Daniel. 

For  the  reasons  already  given,  this  author  accepts  the 
decree  of  Artaxerxes  Longimanus,  in  the  seventh  year 
of  his  reign,  as  given  to  Ezra  and  with  the  date  b.  c.  457 
as  the  terminus  a  quo  or  beginning  point  of  the  490  years, 
and  that  the  coming  of  the  Messiah  refers  to  His  public 
entrance  upon  His  Messianic  office,  which  occurred  at 
His  baptism. 

QUESTIONS 

1.  What  the  nature  of  God's  decree  concerning  the  Jewish 
nation? 

2.  What  the  meaning  of  the  Seventy  Weeks?     Illustrate. 

3.  What  two  other  equal  periods  of  Jewish  probation? 

4.  What  must  be  the  characteristics  of  a  satisfactory  exposi- 
tion? 

5-  What  declaration  marks  the  beginning  of  the  Seventy 
Weeks  ? 

6.  What  the  punctuation,  what  the  theory  and  what  the  dif- 
ficulty of  the  theory  of  the  radical  critics? 

7.  What  a  summary  of  Driver's  theory  and  wherein  does  it 
fail  ? 

8.  What  the  four  decrees,  from  one  of  which  we  must  date  the 
beginning  of  the  490  years,  and  which  is  accepted? 

9.  Test  each  one  and  show  by  adding  490  years  its  end. 

10.  What  the  views  of  Sir  Robert  Anderson  and  Hengsten- 
berg  respectively? 


XI 


THE   MARVELOUS   NINTH   CHAPTER   OF 
DANIEL  (Continued) 

Scripture:    9:1-27 

THIS  chapter  concludes  the  exposition  of  Daniel 
9 :  24-27.  Commencing  where  the  last  chapter 
ends,  we  now  consider 
V.  The  Seven  Weeks,  or  Forty-nine  Years. — "From 
the  going  forth  of  a  commandment  to  restore  and  build 
Jerusalem  unto  the  Anointed  One,  the  Prince,  shall  be 
seven  weeks  and  threescore  and  two  weeks :  it  shall  be 
built  again  with  street  and  moat,  even  in  troublous  times." 
From  this  language  we  gather  three  things  concerning 
Jerusalem:  First,  the  issuance  of  a  commandment  to 
restore  and  build.  Second,  it  shall  be  built  again  in 
troublous  times.  Third,  the  time  assigned  for  the  res- 
toration and  building.  Had  the  coming  of  the  Messiah 
been  the  first  great  event  of  the  future,  the  language 
would  have  been,  "It  shall  be  sixty-nine  weeks  (or  483 
years)  to  Messiah,  the  Prince."  But  the  time  to  the 
Messiah  is  sub-divided  into  two  periods,  seven  weeks 
and  sixty-two  weeks,  p'  linly  setting  apart  the  first  period, 
or  forty-nine  years,  the  restoration  and  rebuilding  of 
Jerusalem. 

In  our  work  <  verification,  therefore,  we  have  two 
conditions  to  n  ,et.  First,  it  devolves  upon  us  to  show 
that  from  the  terminus  a  quo,  b.  c.  457,  the  work  of 
restoration  and  building  was  accomplished  in  forty-nine 

135 


136  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

years,  and,  second,  we  must  prove  that  these  were  troub- 
lous times. 

There  is  no  difficulty  in  identifying  the  troublous  times. 
The  books  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  furnish  abundant  evi- 
dence. There  was  trouble  with  the  people  themselves 
in  keeping  them  up  to  the  necessary  labor  and  sacrifice, 
and  to  the  required  conformity  in  morals. 

Their  neighbors  also  were  ceaseless  in  hostility  and 
obstructions.  The  builder  had  to  carry  both  trowel  and 
sword,  and  be  ready  at  a  moment's  notice  for  either  war 
or  work.  Our  colonial  fathers  had  such  a  time,  when 
every  man  carried  his  rifle  to  the  field  and  to  the  church. 

But  we  cannot  verify  the  time — forty-nine  years — with 
such  exact  precision,  and  yet  the  verification  can  be  made 
reasonably  certain.  These  are  the  items  of  the  argu- 
ment: In  the  book  of  Ezra  we  have  the  statement  that 
he  had  been  in  Jerusalem  prosecuting  the  work  thirteen 
years  before  Nehemiah  came.  Again,  it  is  stated  ex- 
plicitly that  Nehemiah  remained  in  Jerusalem  twelve 
years  on  his  first  visit,  prosecuting  the  work,  thus  mak- 
ing twenty-five  years  of  the  required  time.  It  is  then 
shown  that  he  returned  to  Babylon  and  remained  there 
a  long  time  before  returning  to  Jerusalem  to  complete 
his  work.  The  precise  date  of  his  absence  in  Babylon 
is  not  given,  but  other  circumstances  are  cited  which 
enable  us  to  make  out,  with  reasonable  assurance,  that 
this  absence  was  twenty  years,  during  which  time  Ezra 
worked  alone.  This  brings  up  the  time  to  forty-five 
years,  which  lacks  four  years  of  the  full  period  required. 
But  the  work  of  Nehemiah  goes  on  after  his  return  for 
a  short  time,  before  all  the  items  of  the  restoration  of 
the  Jewish  polity  and  all  the  regulations  of  the  city  life 
are  complete.  If,  then,  we  consider  this  work  after  his 
return,  and  the  loss  of  time  from  the  going  forth  of  the 


NINTH  CHAPTER  OF  DANIEL  137 

commandment,  consumed  by  Ezra  in  organizing  and  con- 
ducting his  caravan  from  Babylon  to  Jerusalem,  we  need 
not  be  troubled  to  account  precisely  for  the  four  years 
needed  to  fill  up  the  period.  The  prophecy  says  forty- 
nine  years,  and  forty-nine  years  it  must  have  been. 

VI.  One  Week,  or  Seven  Years,  as  a  Whole,  Proclaim- 
ing a  New  Covenant  (Jer.  31:31-34)  and  Confirming 
It  with  Many  Jews. — There  has  been  some  difference  of 
opinion  with  reference  to  the  covenant  referred  to  in 
this  prophecy,  some  holding  that  it  is  the  old  covenant, 
but  this  position  is  certainly  untenable.  That  covenant 
had  long  since  been  confirmed  with  all  the  Jews.  We 
take  it,  therefore,  that  the  covenant  in  question  is  the 
one  predicted  by  Jeremiah  in  connection  with  this  whole 
subject,  which  I  here  cite:  "Behold,  the  days  come, 
saith  the  Lord,  that  I  will  make  a  new  covenant  with  the 
house  of  Israel,  and  with  the  house  of  Judah:  not  accord- 
ing to  the  covenant  that  I  made  with  their  fathers  in  the 
day  that  I  took  them  by  the  hand  to  bring  them  out  of 
the  land  of  Egypt ;  which  my  covenant  they  brake, 
although  I  was  a  husband  unto  them,  saith  the  Lord. 
But  this  is  the  covenant  that  I  will  make  with  the  house 
of  Israel  after  those  days,  saith  the  Lord :  I  will  put  my 
law  in  their  inward  parts,  and  in  their  heart  will  I  write 
it :  and  I  will  be  their  God,  and  they  shall  be  my  people 
and  they  shall  teach  no  more  every  man  his  neighbor, 
and  every  man  his  brother,  saying,  Know  the  Lord  ;  for 
they  shall  all  know  me,  from  the  least  of  them  unto  the 
greatest  of  them,  saith  the  Lord :  for  I  will  forgive  their 
iniquity,  and  their  sin  will  I  remember  no  more"  (Jer. 

31:31-34); 

That  this  is  the  covenant  of  our  context  is  manifest 
by  Hebrews  8  and  9,  where  this  text  is  cited  from  Jere- 
miah, with  the  following  comment:     "But  Christ  being 


138  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

come  an  high  priest  of  good  things  to  come,  by  a  greater 
and  more  perfect  tabernacle,  not  made  with  hands,  that 
is  to  say,  not  of  this  building;  neither  by  the  blood  of 
goats  and  calves,  but  by  His  own,  blood.  He  entered  in 
once  into  the  holy  place,  having  obtained  eternal  redemp- 
tion for  us.  For  if  the  blood  of  bulls  and  of  goats,  and 
the  ashes  of  an  heifer  sprinkling  the  unclean,  sanctifieth 
to  the  purifying  of  the  flesh:  hpw  much  more  shall  the 
blood  of  Christ,  who,  through  the  eternal  Spirit,  offered 
himself  without  spot  to  God,  purge  your  conscience  from 
dead  works  to  serve  the  living  God?  And  for  this 
cause  He  is  the  mediator  of  the  New  Covenant,  that  by 
means  of  death,  for  the  redemption  of  the  transgressions 
That  Were  under  the  First  Covenant,  they  which  are 
called  might  receive  the  promise  of  eternal  inheritance" 
(Heb.  9:11-15). 

The  heading  of  the  present  division  shows  that  Christ 
must  confirm  this  new  covenant  with  many  Jews  for 
seven  years,  but  the  context  also  shows  that  He  himself 
dies  in  the  middle  of  the  seven  years,  so  that  this  con- 
firmation as  to  the  first  half  of  the  time  is  by  Christ's 
personal  ministry.  And  that  the  confirmation  of  the 
covenant  by  Him  extends  beyond  His  death  is  evident 
from  the  beginning  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  where 
Luke  affirms  that  his  gospel  was  an  account  of  what 
Jesus  began  both  to  do  and  to  teach  until  the  day  in 
which  He  was  taken  up,  with  the  intimation  that  Acts, 
or  the  second  treatise  by  him,  is  to  give  an  account  of 
what  Jesus  began  both  to  do  and  to  teach  after  His 
ascent  into  Heaven.  So  that  it  will  remain  for  us  to 
show,  in  proper  connections  later,  that  Christ,  after  His 
death,  continued  to  confirm  this  covenant  with  many  Jews 
for  three  and  one-half  years  longer. 

Vn.  One    Week,    or   Seven    Years,    Divided   in    the 


NINTH  CHAPTER  OF  DANIEL  139 

Middle.  First  Half. — The  first  half  of  the  seven  years, 
commencing  with  Christ's  baptism,  is  crowded  with  the 
most  of  the  great  events  foretold  in  this  prophecy  of 
Daniel.  The  following  particulars  must  be  made  to  fit 
into  this  time: 

First,  As  we  have  already  shown,  during  His  public 
ministry,  which  lasted  three  and  one-half  years.  He  did 
confirm  the  covenant  with  many  Jews. 

Second,  The  finishing  of  the  Transgression:  This 
refers  to  the  transgression  of  the  Jews  as  a  people,  and 
by  "finishing"  is  meant  the  filling  up  of  the  measure  of 
their  sins,  just  as  the  Canaanites,  their  predecessors  in 
the  Holy  Land,  retained  it  until  the  measure  of  their 
sins  was  full ;  so,  according  to  Moses,  it  would  be  with 
the  Jews,  that  when  the  measure  of  their  iniquities  is 
full,  they  shall  be  cut  off,  lose  their  title  to  the  land,  and 
be  scattered  over  the  whole  world. 

It  is  evident  from  Daniel's  prayer  that  he  realized  the 
magnitude  and  growing  character  of  the  national  sins. 
Now,  when  we  turn  to  the  New  Testament,  the  evidence 
of  the  finishing  of  the  transgression  is  complete.  This 
language  of  our  Lord  is  decisive  (Matt.  23:31-38): 
"Wherefore  ye  be  witnesses  unto  yourselves,  that  ye  are 
the  children  of  them  which  killed  the  prophets.  Fill  ye 
up,  then,  the  measure  of  your  fathers.  Ye  serpents,  ye 
generation  of  vipers,  how  can  ye  escape  the  damnation 
of  hell?  Wherefore,  behold,  I  send  unto  you  prophets, 
and  wise  men,  and  scribes ;  and  Some  of  them  ye  shall 
kill  and  crucify;  and  Some  of  them  shall  ye  scourge  in 
your  synagogues,  and  persecute  Them  from  city  to  city ; 
that  upon  you  may  come  all  the  righteous  blood  shed 
upon  the  earth,  from  the  blood  of  righteous  Abel  unto 
the  blood  of  Zacharias,  son  of  Barachias,  whom  ye  slew 
between  the  temple  and  the  altar.     Verily,  I  say  unto 


140  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

you,  all  these  things  shall  come  upon  this  generation. 
O  Jerusalem,  Jerusalem,  thou  that  killest  the  prophets, 
and  stonest  them  which  are  sent  unto  thee,  how  often 
would  I  have  gathered  thy  children  together,  even  as  a 
hen  gathereth  her  chickens  under  her  wings,  and  ye  would 
not  I    Behold,  your  house  is  left  unto  you  desolate." 

This  is  further  evident  by  the  two  fig  trees.  Toward 
the  close  of  His  ministry  He  publishes  the  parable  con- 
cerning the  barren  fig  tree,  closing  with  this  language 
(Luke  13:7-9)  :  "Then  said  he  unto  the  dresser  of  his 
vineyard,  behold,  these  three  years  I  come  seeking  fruit 
on  this  fig  tree,  and  find  none ;  cut  it  down ;  why  cum- 
bereth  it  the  ground?  And  he  answering  said  unto  him, 
Lord,  let  it  alone  this  year  also,  till  I  shall  dig  about  it, 
and  dung  it ;  and  if  it  bear  fruit,  well,  and  if  not,  then 
after  that  thou  shalt  cut  it  down."  The  signification  of 
the  parable  finds  its  confirmation  at  the  end  of  His 
ministry.  When  He  had  entered  the  city  in  triumph 
and  had  been  publicly  proclaimed  as  the  Messiah,  and 
had  a  second  time  cleansed  the  temple,  the  following 
event  took  place  (Matt.  21 :  18-20)  :  "Now,  in  the  morn- 
ing, as  He  returned  into  the  city,  He  hungered.  And 
when  He  saw  a  fig  tree  in  the  way,  He  came  to  it,  and 
found  nothing  thereon  but  leaves  only,  and  said  unto  it, 
Let  no  fruit  grow  on  thee  henceforward  forever.  And 
presently  the  fig  tree  withered  away.  And  when  the 
disciples  saw  it,  they  marveled,  saying,  how  soon  is  the 
fig  tree  withered  away !" 

This  clearly  shows  that  the  day  of  probation  for  the 
Jewish  nation  is  about  to  end.  This  is  further  confirmed 
thus  (Luke  19:41-44)  :  "And  when  He  was  come  near, 
He  beheld  the  city,  and  wept  over  it,  saying,  if  thou 
hadst  known,  even  thou,  at  least  in  this  thy  day,  the 
things  which  belong  unto  thy  peace!   but  now  they  are 


NINTH  CHAPTER  OF  DANIEL  141 

hid  from  thine  eyes.  For  the  days  shall  come  upon  thee, 
that  thine  enemies  shall  cast  a  trench  about  thee,  and 
compass  thee  round,  and  keep  thee  in  on  every  side,  and 
shall  lay  thee  even  with  the  ground  and  thy  children  with 
thee ;  and  they  shall  not  leave  in  thee  one  stone  upon 
another;  because  thou  knewest  not  the  time  of  thy  visi- 
tation." And  still  more  notably  confirmed  by  the  parable 
of  the  vineyard,  which  closes  thus  (Luke  20:13-16): 
"Then  said  the  Lord  of  the  vineyard,  what  shall  I  do? 
I  will  send  my  beloved  son ;  it  may  be  they  will  rever- 
ence him  when  they  see  him.  But  when  the  husband- 
men saw  him  they  reasoned  among  themselves,  saying, 
this  is  the  heir ;  come,  let  us  kill  him,  that  the  inherit- 
ance may  be  ours.  So  they  cast  him  out  of  the  vineyard, 
and  killed  him.  What,  therefore,  shall  the  lord  of  the 
vineyard  do  unto  them?  He  shall  come  and  destroy 
these  husbandmen,  and  shall  give  the  vineyard  to  others. 
And  when  they  heard  it,  they  said,  God  forbid." 

Language  could  not  express  more  forcibly  the  culmi- 
nation of  the  Jewish  sins,  and  from  the  day  these  words 
were  uttered  to  the  present  time  there  has  been  no  sus- 
pension of  the  sentence  against  the  Jews.  Their  last 
period  of  probation  commenced  with  the  baptism  of 
Christ  and  closed  three  and  one-half  years  later,  when 
He  entered  the  city  as  the  Messiah,  though  for  many 
elect  the  period  lasted  three  and  one-half  years  longer. 

Third.  The  Cutting  Off  of  the  Messiah:  The  crown- 
ing act  of  their  transgression  was  the  cutting  off  of  the 
Messiah.  The  language  of  our  prophecy  is  very  sig- 
nificant: "Messiah  shall.be  cut  off  and  shall  have  noth- 
ing," that  is  to  say,  when  they  betrayed,  condemned,  and 
surrendered  their  Messiah  to  the  ignominious  death  on 
the  Roman  cross,  not  only  was  He  cut  off,  but  they  were 
cut  off.     From  henceforth  He  was  to  have  nothing  in 


142  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

them  or  their  city  until  after  thousands  of  years;  until 
they  should,  in  fulfillment  of  other  prophecies,  say, 
"Blessed  is  He  that  cometh  in  the  name  of  the  Lord." 
The  city  remained,  indeed,  for  a  little  while,  but  sen- 
tence had  been  passed ;  the  sanctuary  remained  for  a 
short  period,  but  it  was  an  empty  and  desolate  house. 

Fourth.  Making  an  End  of  Sin :  This  language  re- 
fers to  the  inefficient  character  of  the  Jewish  sacrifices. 
Though  for  ages  hecatombs  of  victims  had  been  sacri- 
ficed upon  Jewish  altars,  no  sin  was  actually  brought  to 
an  end.  Because  it  was  impossible,  says  the  letter  to 
the  Hebrews,  that  the  blood  of  bullocks  and  goats  could 
take  away  sin ;  they  typified  that  which  would  make  an 
end  of  sin,  and  passed  the  transgressions  over  until  the 
Antitype  should  come.  In  his  prayer,  Daniel  seems  to 
have  a  keen  sense  of  the  fact  that  the  sins  from  the 
days  of  Moses  to  his  time  remained.  While  the  penalty 
had  not  been  executed,  the  account  had  been  simply 
carried  or  passed  over  for  the  time  being.  He  felt  that 
no  absolute  end  had  been  found  for  any  of  the  offenses 
from  the  beginning  of  the  world  until  his  day.  There 
had  been  many  promises  not  yet  fulfilled — many  hopes 
that  had  not  yet  reached  fruition,  and  therefore  the  in- 
tense agony  of  his  prayer:  "O  Lord,  hear!  O  Lord, 
forgive ;  O  Lord,  hearken  and  do ;  defer  not ;  for  thine 
own  sake,  O  my  God,  because  thy  city  and  thy  people 
are  called  by  thy  name."  The  letter  to  the  Hebrews,  in 
a  remarkable  way,  shows  the  shadowy  nature  of  the  old 
covenant  which  could  make  nothing  perfect,  and  particu- 
larly it  could  make  no  end  of  sin. 

Fifth.  Making  Reconciliation  for  Iniquity :  The  mak- 
ing an  end  of  sin  was  to  be  accomplished  by  a  real  and 
not  a  typical  atonement.  There  was  to  be  an  absolute 
expiation.    This  expiation,  as  foreshadowed  in  the  types. 


NINTH  CHAPTER  OF  DANIEL  143 

was  to  be  through  a  vicarious  sacrifice.  There  would 
come  a  true  Lamb  of  God  to  take  away  the  sin  of  the 
world.  This  atonement  was  not  to  be  affected  by  many 
offerings,  but  by  one  offering.  As  it  is  expressed  in  the 
letter  to  the  Hebrews,  "But  now,  once  in  the  end  of  the 
world,  hath  He  appeared  to  put  away  sin  by  the  sacrifice 
of  himself,  and  as  it  is  appointed  unto  man  once  to  die, 
but  after  this  the  judgment ;  so  Christ  was  once  offered 
to  bear  the  sins  of  many."  This  bearing  of  sin  is  further 
set  forth  in  the  prophecy  o£  Isaiah:  "He  was  wounded 
for  our  transgressions ;  He  was  bruised  for  our  iniqui- 
ties; the  chastisement  of  our  peace  was  upon  Him,  and 
with  His  stripes  we  are  healed ;  all  we,  like  sheep,  have 
gone  astray;  we  have  turned  everyone  to  his  own  way, 
and  the  Lord  hath  laid  on  Him  the  iniquity  of  us  all. 
He  was  cut  off  out  of  the  land  of  the  living,  for  the 
transgression  of  my  people  was  He  stricken.  It  pleased 
to  Lord  to  bruise  Him  ;  He  hath  put  Him  to  grief ;  when 
thou  shalt  make  His  soul  an  offering  for  sin,  He  shall 
prolong  His  days  and  the  pleasure  of  the  Lord  shall 
prosper  in  His  hands.  By  His  knowledge  shall  my  right- 
eous servant  justify  many,  and  He  shall  bear  their  iniqui- 
ties. He  poured  out  His  soul  unto  death,  and  was  num- 
bered with  the  transgressors ;  yet  He  bear  the  sin  of 
many  and  made  intercession  for  the  transgressors." 

Sixth.  Bringing  in  Everlasting  Righteousness:  All 
the  righteousness  that  Daniel  had  ever  seen  was  very 
imperfect,  and  all  the  atonements  were  only  shadows,  but 
this  coming  Messiah,  according  to  Jeremiah,  was  to  be 
called  "The  Lord,  Our  Righteousness."  In  Him  alone 
was  no  deceit  or  guile  ever  found.  His  life  on  earth  was 
perfect  from  His  conception  by  the  virgin  to  His  ascent 
into  heaven.  The  righteousness  that  He  was  to  bring 
in  by  His  expiatory  sacrifice  of  himself  was  to  be  a 


144  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

righteousness  for  His  people,  and  it  would  be  perfect,  spot- 
less, eternal !  The  goodness  of  the  best  of  the  Jews  was 
like  the  morning  dew  or  the  passing  cloud,  but  this  right- 
eousness brought  in  by  Him  was  to  be  so  perfect  that  one 
justified  by  it  might  stand  under  the  unsheathed  and 
flaming  sword  of  divine  justice  and  challenge,  "Who  shall 
lay  anything  to  the  charge  of  God's  elect  ?  It  is  God  that 
justifieth.  It  is  Christ  that  died."  Hence  the  remark- 
able language  in  the  letter  to  the  Corinthians:  "God 
made  him  to  be  sin  who  knew  no  sin,  that  we  might  be 
made  the  righteousness  of  God  in  Him." 

Seventh.  Sealing  Up  Vision  and  Prophecy :  This  seal- 
ing up  seems  to  mean  a  closing  up  by  fulfillment,  and  also 
to  signify  the  termination  of  the  obligations  of  the  cove- 
nant under  which  these  visions  and  prophecies  were 
given.  Therefore  our  Lord  uses  the  following  language : 
"The  law  and  the  prophets  were  until  John  and  since 
that  time  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  preached." 

Eighth.  Causing  Sacrifice  and  Oblation  to  Cease,  or 
the  Rejecting  of  the  Old,  Typical  Temple  and  Covenant 
(Matt.  27:51,  and  Col.  2:14-17;  Heb.  7  to  10):  The 
temple  was  the  house  of  sacrifice  and  oblation,  but  it  is 
recorded  that  at  the  very  moment  that  Jesus  cried,  "It 
is  finished !"  and  yielded  up  His  spirit — at  that  precise 
moment,  by  supernatural  power,  "The  veil  of  the  temple 
was  rent  in  twain  from  top  to  bottom."  In  that  death 
He  blotted  out  the  handwriting  of  all  Old  Testament 
ordinances  that  were  against  us  and  contrary  to  us,  and 
took  the  whole  covenant  out  of  the  way,  nailing  it  to  His 
cross.  And  having  spoiled  principalities  and  powers.  He 
made  a  show  of  them  openly,  triumphing  over  them. 
From  that  time  on  the  imperious  regulations  of  the  Jew- 
ish festivals  lost  their  legal  force,  hence  it  was  said, 
"Let  no  man  therefore  judge  you  in  meat  or  in  drink  or 


NINTH  CHAPTER  OF  DANIEL  145 

in  respect  of  the  holy  day  or  of  the  new  moon  or  of  the 
Sabbath  days,  which  are  a  shadow  of  things  to  come, 
but  the  body  is  of  Qirist."  The  seventh  day  Sabbath, 
the  monthly  Sabbath,  the  annual  Sabbaths,  the  jubilee 
Sabbath,  were  all  taken  away,  and  the  institutions  of  the 
new  covenant  take  their  place.  Upon  this  point  let  any 
interested  student  carefully  read  the  letter  to  the  Hebrews, 
and  particularly  chapters  7  to  10,  inclusive. 

Ninth.  Anointing  the  Most  Holy,  or  the  Consecration 
of  the  New  Antitypical  Temple  (Acts  2)  :  Upon  this 
point  commentators  have  been  hard  pressed.  They  seem 
to  think  it  necessary  for  them  to  prove  that  this  anoint- 
ing is  the  anointing  of  a  person,  and  therefore  labor  to 
show  that  it  was  fulfilled  at  Christ's  baptism  when  He 
was  anointed  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  It  is  possible  to  make  a 
plausible  showing  in  this  direction,  and  the  Hebrew 
would  admit,  by  strained  argument,  this  application. 
For  many  reasons,  however,  I  am  myself  convinced  that 
we  should  follow  the  clearer  meaning  of  the  Hebrew 
that  it  was  the  anointing  of  a  holy  place — not  a  person. 
When  the  tabernacle  was  built,  Moses  was  required  to 
anoint  it.  Now,  as  both  tabernacle  and  temple  are  super- 
seded, the  question  arises,  Has  God  no  temple  on  earth, 
no  sanctuary?  The  New  Testament  is  clear  that  the 
antitype  on  earth  of  the  Jewish  tabernacle  and  temple  is 
the  church  of  Jesus  Christ.  Paul  says  to  the  Corinthians : 
"Ye  are  God's  building;  ye  are  the  temple  of  the  living 
God."  And  in  the  letter  to  the  Ephesians  he  says,  with  ref- 
erence to  every  church :  "In  Christ  each  several  building, 
fitly  framed  together,  groweth  into  a  holy  temple  in  the 
Lord."  And  concerning  the  church  at  Ephesus,  he  says : 
"In  whom  ye  also  are  builded  together  for  a  habitation 
of  God  in  the  spirit."  Jesus  himself  instituted  His 
Church.     He  took  the  material  that  John  had  prepared 


146  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

for  Him  and  added  to  it  other  material  prepared  by 
Himself  in  confirming  the  covenant  with  many  Jews 
during  His  ministry,  established  its  ordinances  of  bap- 
tism and  the  Lord's  supper,  ordained  its  apostles,  set 
them  in  the  church,  gave  to  the  church  its  laws,  but  said 
to  them,  "Tarry  ye  in  Jerusalem  until  ye  are  endued  by 
power  from  on  high."  Just  as  the  tabernacle,  when  it 
was  completed  by  Solomon  became  also  an  habitation  of 
God  through  the  infilling  cloud,  so  now,  having  con- 
demned and  emptied  and  made  desolate  the  old  temple, 
it  becomes  necessary  to  anoint  a  new  Most  Holy  to  take 
its  place.  This  was  fulfilled,  as  recorded  in  Acts  2,  when 
the  church  was  anointed  by  the  outpouring  of  the  Holy 
Spirit. 

Second  Half:  Confirming  a  New  Covenant  with  Many 
Jews  for  3^/2  Years  More,  i.  e.,  Up  to  the  Time  of  the 
Gentiles,  Which  Is  the  Terminus  ad  Quern. 

The  prophecy  would  not  be  complete  in  its  fulfillment 
unless  we  were  able  to  show  that  the  confirmation  of 
the  new  covenant  with  many  Jews  continued  for  y/2 
years  after  the  death  of  Christ.  But  here  the  record  is 
exceptionally  clear.  On  the  day  that  the  new  most  holy 
was  anointed  3,000  Jews  were  converted.  In  that  3^ 
years  it  is  stated  that  5,000  men,  not  counting  women  or 
children,  were  converted.  Again,  it  is  stated  more  than 
once  that  great  multitudes  of  the  Jews,  including  the 
priests,  were  converted.  In  that  y/2  years  one  might 
safely  conclude  that  100,000  Jews  were  converted  and 
brought  to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth  in  the  remarkable 
protracted  meeting,  which  lasted  from  the  day  of  Pente- 
cost to  the  persecution  under  Saul  of  Tarsus. 

But  now  comes  a  most  significant  thing.  With  that 
persecution  the  church  is  scattered  abroad,  leaving  only 
the  apostles.    They  go  in  their  dispersion  to  many  lands 


NINTH  CHAPTER  OF  DANIEL  147 

and  preach  the  gospel  of  Christ.  Philip  leads  multitudes 
of  the  Samaritans  to  the  acceptance  of  Christ.  He  also 
baptizes  the  Ethiopian  eunuch,  and  he  in  turn  carries  the 
gospel  to  his  own  country.  Some  of  them  went  as  far 
as  to  Antioch,  and  there  preached  the  gospel  to  the  Gen- 
tiles. From  this  time  on  there  are  no  records  of  great 
multitudes  of  Jews  being  converted.  The  week  is  ended : 
the  seven  years  have  reached  their  terminus.  Since 
Christ's  public  ministry  commenced,  after  His  baptism, 
to  the  end  of  these  seven  years,  a  vast  multitude  of 
Jews  have  been  confirmed  in  the  new  covenant.  From 
this  time  on  the  conversion  of  a  Jew  will  be  the  excep- 
tion, and  not  the  rule.  The  Bible  history  itself  turns 
now  to  the  Gentiles,  and  the  close  of  the  y/2  years  of 
this  wonderfully  successful  Jewish  evangelization  is  the 
terminus  ad  qiiem  of  Daniel's  490  years. 

Vni.  After  the  Seventy  Weeks. — It  has  been  objected 
by  some  critics  that  this  prophecy  of  Daniel  points  to 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  that  this  destruction 
should  be  included  in  the  seventy  weeks,  or  490  years. 
The  answer  is  obvious.  The  sentence  upon  the  Jewish 
people  was  passed  at  the  death  of  Christ,  but  the  execu- 
tion of  the  penalty  upon  the  city  and  the  sanctuary  is 
another  matter,  and  will  soon  come.  The  prophecy  itself' 
seems  to  put  that  execution  in  the  future  beyond  the 
seventy  weeks.  It  notes  the  fact  that  "the  people  of  the 
prince  that  'shall  come'  shall  destroy  the  city  and  the 
sanctuary."  It  does  not  say  that  this  Prince  will  come 
in  the  seventy  weeks.  We  may  notice,  therefore,  the  fol- 
lowing items  of  the  prophecy  to  be  fulfilled  after  the 
seventy  weeks : 

(i)  The  coming  of  the  prince.  This  prince  is  Titus. 
Our  Lord  himself  directs  the  attention  of  the  condemned 
Jews  to  his  coming.    He  tells  them  that  Jerusalem  shall 


14f8  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

be  encompassed  with  armies,  and  that  the  Abomination 
of  Desolation  spoken  of  by  Daniel,  in  this  prophecy, 
shall  be  set  up.  He  gives  them  a  detailed  description  of 
the  destruction  of  their  city  and  sanctuary,  and  compares 
it,  as  does  Daniel,  to  a  flood:  "As  it  was  in  the  days  of 
Noah,  so  shall  it  be  in  the  days  of  the  Son  of  Man." 
The  flood  came  suddenly  and  took  them  all  away. 

(2)  The  prophecy  also  shows  that  this  flood  of  wrath 
on  the  Jewish  people  is  determined  unto  the  end,  i.  e., 
until  the  times  of  the  fulness  of  the  Gentiles.  Nearly 
2,000  years  have  passed  away.  His  words  yet  receive 
confirmation.  Jerusalem  is  still  trodden  under  foot  by 
the  Gentiles.  The  kingdom  of  heaven,  taken  from  the 
Jews  and  given  to  the  Gentiles,  is  still  presented  in  power 
by  that  missionary  people,  to  whom  the  oracles  of  the 
New  Testament  are  committed.  So  that  we  may  agree 
that  this  marvelous  ninth  chapter  of  Daniel  is  the  most 
remarkable  prophecy  of  the  Old  Testament. 

QUESTIONS 

1.  Into  what  divisions  is  the  70  weeks  apportioned? 

2.  What  must  be  done  in  the  seven  weeks,  or  49  years? 

3.  What  the  proof  that  this  was  done? 

4.  Who  comes  at  the  end  of  the  62  weeks  following  the  seven, 
what  does  he  do,  and  what  the  proof? 

5.  How  is  the  last  week,  or  seven  years,  divided,  and  what 
the  culmination  marking  the  division? 

6.  In  the  first  half  of  the  last  week  what,  says  the  prophecy, 
is  to  be  done? 

7.  What  the  meaning  of  "confirming  the  covenant  with  many 
Jews"  in  this  first  half? 

8.  What  the  meaning  of  "finishing  the  transgression?"  Proof? 

9.  What  the  meaning  of  "cutting  off  the  Messiah?" 

10.  What  the  meaning  of  "making  an  end  of  sin?" 

11.  What  the  meaning  of  "making  reconciliation  for  iniquity?" 

12.  What  the  meaning  of  "bringing  in  everlasting  righteous- 
ness?" 

13.  What  the  meaning  of  "sealing  up  vision  and  prophecy?" 

14.  What  the  meaning  of  "causing  the  sacrifice,  etc.,  to  cease?" 

15.  What  the  meaning  of  "anointing  the  most  holy?" 

16.  In  the  second  half  of  the  last  week  what  is  done,  and  when 
does  it  end? 

17.  What  events  follow  the  70  weeks? 


XII 

THE  GLORIOUS  VISION  OF  THE  SON  OF  GOD 
Scripture:  Dan.  10:1-21 

THIS  chapter  begins  the  consideration  of  the  sev- 
enth prophetic  section  of  Daniel,  chapter  10  of 
the  book.  The  theme  of  the  chapter  is  the  Glori- 
ous Vision  of  the  Son  of  God.  In  the  first  discussion  on 
the  ninth  chapter  we  have  seen  the  prophet  in  great 
distress  because,  though  the  seventy  years  of  desolation 
foretold  by  Jeremiah  were  about  ended,  and  though 
Cyrus,  the  deliverer,  according  to  Isaiah,  had  come,  yet 
Israel  remained  in  captivity.  In  this  chapter  we  find 
the  prophet  in  great  distress  again,  because,  though  Cyrus 
had  issued  his  decree  of  restoration,  and  though  a  num- 
ber of  the  exiles  had  returned,  yet  the  work  of  restora- 
tion at  Jerusalem  was  moving  slowly,  and  in  the  midst 
of  great  opposition. 

To  get  a  clear  view  of  the  last  section  of  the  book  of 
Daniel  we  must  look  at  chapter  10  as  a  prologue ;  chapter 
II  and  three  verses  of  12  as  the  prophecy,  and  the  rest 
of  chapter  12  as  the  epilogue. 

The  whole  section  of  three  chapters  is  a  revelation 
concerning  a  great  war  which  opens  first  in  the  spiritual 
world  between  contending  angels,  back  of  the  nations, 
whose  details  are  given  in  the  tenth  chapter,  and  there 
opens  on  earth  a  war  whose  details  are  give  in  chapter 
II.     The   date  is  the  third  year  of  Cyrus,   about  the 

149 


150  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

twenty-fourth  day  of  the  first  month  of  the  Jewish  year, 
that  is,  the  twenty-fourth  day  of  Nisan. 

The  occasion  is  the  great  mourning,  fasting,  and 
prayer  of  Daniel  lasting  three  weeks.  How  higher  critics 
can  object  to  this  book  on  the  ground  that  Daniel  shows 
little  interest  in  his  countrymen  is  an  amazing  thing. 
When  we  study  that  ninth  chapter  and  see  his  very  soul 
poured  out  to  God  in  behalf  of  his  people ;  when  we  look 
at  him  here  for  three  weeks  bowed  down  in  mourning 
and  prayer  and  in  fasting  on  account  of  his  people,  we 
can't  have  any  respect  for  the  objection  of  a  higher  critic. 

The  place  is  on  the  Tigris  (Hiddekel),  about  sixty 
miles  from  Babylon,  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates  being  con- 
nected with  a  canal.  I  don't  know  that  Daniel  went  on 
the  canal  boat,  but  there  was  connection,  in  Daniel's  time 
and  before  his  time,  between  these  two  rivers  by  a  canal, 
just  as  the  canal  built  by  the  Chicago  people  connecting 
the  Chicago  river  with  the  Illinois,  thus  putting  the 
waters  of  Lake  Michigan  and  the  Mississippi  river  in 
touch  with  each  other.  The  Tigris  is  to  Persia  what  the 
Euphrates  was  to  Babylonia.  Those  present  are  Daniel 
and  a  few  companions. 

Since  the  prophecy  in  the  ninth  chapter  great  events 
have  occurred,  but  the  results  are  so  far  disappointing. 
These  events  are  (the  events  that  come  in  between  the 
ninth  chapter  of  Daniel  and  the  tenth  chapter  of 
Daniel)  — 

First,  the  Cyrus-decree,  not  only  put  in  writing,  but 
preserved  in  the  archives  where  it  was  found  by  Darius 
Hystaspes  many  years  later  (See  Ezra  6:1-5).  It  is  in 
the  first  chapter  of  Ezra:  "Now  in  the  first  year  of 
Cyrus,  king  of  Persia,  that  the  word  of  Jehovah  by  the 
mouth  of  Jeremiah  might  be  accomplished,  Jehovah 
stirred  up  the  spirit  of  Cyrus,  king  of  Persia,  so  that  he 


VISION  OF  THE  SON  OF  GOD  151 

made  a  proclamation  throughout  all  his  kingdom,  and 
put  it  also  in  writing,  saying,  Thus  saith  Cyrus,  king  of 
Persia,  All  the  kingdoms  of  the  earth  hath  Jehovah,  the 
God  of  Heaven,  given  me;  and  He  hath  charged  me  to 
build  Him  a  house  in  Jerusalem,  which  is  in  Judah. 
Whosoever  there  is  among  you  of  all  of  His  people,  his 
God  be  with  him,  and  let  him  go  up  to  Jerusalem,  which 
is  in  Judah,  and  build  the  house  of  Jehovah,  the  God  of 
Israel  (He  is  God),  which  is  in  Jerusalem.  And  who- 
soever is  left,  in  any  place  where  he  sojourneth,  let  the 
men  of  his  place  help  him  with  silver,  and  with  gold,  and 
with  goods,  and  with  beasts,  besides  the  free-will  offering 
for  the  house  of  God  which  is  in  Jerusalem."  That  is 
the  first  event. 

Upon  that  event,  note  this  remark :  We  must  not  con- 
clude too  much  from  these  words  of  Cyrus.  While  he 
is  the  servant  of  Jehovah  even  more  than  he  knows,  yet 
political  rather  than  religious  motives  influenced  him  to 
issue  this  proclamation.  We  know  from  an  inscription 
brought  to  light  in  1879  that  he  was  just  as  compli- 
mentary in  his  references  to  the  heathen  gods  as  to 
Jehovah.  His  policy  was  to  leave  all  his  subjects  free 
to  worship  any  god  they  chose,  without  state  interfer- 
ence, and  that  is  a  grand  policy.  His  further  policy  was 
to  send  back  to  their  own  places  the  captured  idols  or 
sacred  vessels  stored  in  Babylon  by  the  preceding  gov- 
ernment, the  one  which  he  overthrew.  This  inscription, 
speaking  of  the  various  races  dwelling  between  the  Med- 
iterranean Sea  and  Persian  Gulf,  reads  as  follows: 

"The  gods  who  dwelt  among  them  to  their  places  I 
restored,  and  I  assigned  them  a  permanent  habitation. 
All  their  people  I  assembled,  and  I  increased  their  prop- 
erty ;  and  the  gods  of  Sumin  and  Akkad  whom  Naboni- 
dus  had  introduced  at  the  festivals  of  the  Lord  of  the 


155  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

gods  at  Kal-anna  by  the  command  of  Merodach  the  great 
Lord,  I  assigned  them  an  honorable  seat  in  the  sanctua- 
ries, as  was  enjoyed  by  all  the  other  gods  in  their  own 
cities.  And  daily  I  prayed  to  Bel  and  Nebo  that  they 
would  lengthen  my  days,  and  increase  my  good  fortune, 
and  would  repeat  to  Merodach  my  Lord  that  'Thy  wor- 
shipper, Cyrus,  the  king,  and  his  son  Cambyses,' "  etc. 
This  shows  that  Cyrus  was  a  shrewd  politician.  He 
captured  Babylon  largely  by  claiming  to  be  the  friend  of 
the  imprisoned  deities  and  priests  that  the  Babylonians 
had  gathered  there  from  plundered  nations,  therefore  a 
big  crowd  inside  was  in  favor  of  his  capturing  Babylon, 
and  when  he  got  it  he  did  send  all  these  captured  idols 
back  home  to  their  own  places,  as  the  allied  armies  when 
they  defeated  Bonaparte  and  captured  Paris  sent  back 
the  masterpieces  of  painting  and  sculpture  appropriated 
by  the  French  armies  when  they  overran  Italy  and  the 
other  nations  of  the  earth. 

The  Second  Event.  In  response  to  his  decree  con- 
cerning the  Jews,  as  we  learn  from  the  book  of  Ezra, 
only  42,600  Jews  returned  at  that  time.  They  were 
mainly  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  but  the  record  shows  rep- 
resentatives of  the  tribes  of  Levi,  Benjamin,  Ephraim, 
and  Manasseh.  Of  this  number  about  one-tenth,  4,280, 
were  priests.  It  speaks  well  for  the  priests  that  they 
were  so  largely  represented,  but  there  were  only  about 
750  Levites,  which  is  disparaging  to  them,  as  they  con- 
stituted the  bulk  of  the  tribe  of  Levi.  The  civil  leader 
was  Zerubbabel,  of  the  line  of  David,  and  the  spiritual 
leader  was  Joshua,  the  high  priest.  It  is  noteworthy 
that  on  their  return  they  make  no  attempt  to  restore  the 
monarchy.  Zerubbabel  is  only  a  governor,  and  subject 
to  the  Persian  viceroy  of  Syria.  A  council  of  twelve 
men,   chiefs   of   the   fathers,   including  Zerubbabel  and 


VISION  OF  THE  SON  OF  GOD  158 

Joshua,  constitute  their  civil  government.  It  took  them 
seven  months  merely  to  clear  away  the  rubbish  and  get 
a  level  place  for  putting  the  temple  back  on  its  old  site, 
and  so  matters  moved  slowly.  As  the  decree  of  restora- 
tion was  in  the  first  year  of  Cyrus,  and  this  vision  in  his 
third  year,  we  do  not  have  to  go  far  to  find  out  the  cause 
of  Daniel's  mourning  and  fasting.  He  is  grieving  at  the 
small  number  who  were  willing  to  return  and  restore 
Jerusalem  and  rebuild  the  temple ;  he  was  grieving  at 
the  difTficulties  in  the  way  of  the  returned  exiles  and 
the  oppositions  obstructing  their  progress.  He  couldn't 
understand  it,  and  so  the  first  day  of  the  first  month  of 
the  Jewish  year  he  begins  to  fast  and  pray.  He  prays 
two  weeks,  until  the  Passover  comes,  the  14th  of  Nisan, 
and  gets  no  answer.  He  continues  to  pray  through  the 
week  of  the  days  of  unleavened  bread — seven  days  more, 
making  twenty-one  days  of  mourning,  fasting  and 
prayer.  Let  us  observe  the  kind  of  fasting,  not  abso- 
lute abstinence  from  food,  as  in  the  forty  days  of  Moses 
and  Elijah,  but  as  our  record  says,  "I  ate  no  pleasant 
bread,  neither  flesh  nor  wine  came  into  my  mouth."  From 
his  position  overlooking  the  whole  world,  and  having 
charge  of  its  affairs,  he  knew  that  his  brethren  at  Jeru- 
salem are  at  this  time  keeping  their  first  passover  after 
their  return. 

He  receives  no  instant  answer  to  his  prayer  as  in  the 
ninth  chapter.  And  then  sets  out  on  his  visit  to  the 
Tigris  River,  sixty  miles  away,  and  there,  on  the  24th 
day  of  the  month,  that  is,  three  days  after  he  quit  pray- 
ing, attended  by  a  few  companions,  he  gets  an  answer 
to  his  prayer  that  knocks  him  ofif  his  feet:  He  sees  the 
vision  of  the  Son  of  God  and  obtains  an  explanation  of 
the  delay  in  the  answer  to  his  prayer.  When  centuries 
later  Saul  of  Tarsus  saw  at  midday  near  Damascus  a 


154  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

vision  of  the  same  glorious  Person  that  Daniel  sees  here, 
the  record  says,  "The  men  that  journeyed  with  him 
stood  speechless,  hearing  a  voice  but  seeing  no  man." 
Now  this  record  says  (and  let  us  observe  the  likeness), 
seventh  verse  :  "I,  Daniel,  alone  saw  the  vision  ;  for  the 
men  that  were  with  me  saw  not  the  vision,  but  a  great 
quaking  fell  upon  them  and  they  fled  to  hide  themselves." 
How  very  much  like  that  is  the  account  of  Saul's  seeing 
the  Lord!  What  Daniel  saw  was  this:  "I  lifted  mine 
eyes  and  looked  and  beheld  a  man  clothed  in  new  linen 
whose  loins  were  girded  with  pure  gold  of  Uphaz.  His 
body  also  was  like  the  beryl  and  his  arms  and  his  feet 
like  unto  burnished  brass,  and  the  voice  of  his  words  like 
the  voice  of  a  multitude." 

Now  let  us  see  how  He  looked  when  John  saw  Him 
in  the  island  of  Patmos,  that  we  may  note  another  re- 
markable likeness :  "I  saw  one  like  unto  the  Son  of 
Man  clothed  with  a  garment  down  to  the  feet  and  girded 
about  at  the  breast  with  a  golden  girdle."  That  tallies 
exactly  with  this  account,  "And  His  head  and  His  hair 
were  white  as  snow  and  His  eyes  were  as  a  flame  of 
fire."  In  this  account  the  eyes  are  "like  flaming  torches," 
"and  His  feet  like  unto  burnished  brass,  as  if  it  had  been 
refined  in  a  furnace,  and  His  voice  as  the  voice  of  many 
waters."    The  tally  is  perfect. 

What  Daniel  saw  was  a  pre-manifestation  of  the  Son 
of  God.  There  are  three  pre-manifestations  in  this  book, 
Dan.  3:24,  8:15,  and  10:5-6.  There  are  many  others 
in  the  Old  Testament.  As  the  Son  of  God,  or  the  Logos, 
He  appeared  to  Abraham,  Moses,  Job,  Isaiah,  and  Eze- 
kiel,  and  always  He  appears  in  the  time  of  a  great  dark- 
ness and  of  great  distress  to  His  people.  The  efifect  of 
the  appearance  on  Daniel  is  very  great.  Let  us  see: 
"So,"  that  is,  when  the  companions  went  away,  "I  was 


VISION  OF  THE  SON  OF  GOD  155 

left  alone  and  saw  this  great  vision  and  there  remained 
no  strength  in  me,  for  my  comeliness  was  turned  in  me 
into  corruption  and  I  retained  no  strength."  He  refers 
to  it  again  in  another  place,  showing  that  he  fell  into  a 
trance  of  unconsciousness. 

It  is  both  interesting  and  suggestive  to  compare  the 
effect  on  Daniel  when  he  saw  the  glorious  Son  of  God 
with  the  experience  of  others  who  saw  Him  in  glory, 
both  before  His  incarnation  and  after  His  exaltation. 
It  terrified  all  of  them,  took  away  all  human  strength, 
humbled  them  in  the  very  dust,  made  them  keenly  con- 
scious of  their  own  sinfulness  in  the  light  of  the  divine 
holiness,  led  them  into  most  gracious  experiences  of  the 
divine  condescension  and  to  higher  consecration  and 
power. 

Abraham  was  converted  by  it  (Gen.  15),  as  also  was 
Jacob  (Gen.  28: 10-28),  and  later  by  another  experience 
became  a  prince,  having  power  with  God  and  man  (Gen. 
32:22-32).  The  face  of  Moses  was  made  to  shine 
(Ex.  34:29,  30),  Paul  fell  to  the  earth  and  was  con- 
verted (Acts  9,  22,  26).  Nebuchadnezzar  was  startled 
and  reformed  (Dan.  3:24-30).  John  fell  like  one  dead 
(Rev.  1:17).  Ezekiel  fell  as  if  struck  by  lightning 
(i  :28).  Job,  who  could  proudly  maintain  his  righteous- 
ness and  hold  up  his  head  before  Eliphaz,  Bildad,  Zophar, 
and  Elihu,  thus  speaks  when  he  meets  the  Almighty : 
"Behold,  I  am  of  small  account,  and  what  shall  I  answer 
thee?  I  laid  my  hand  upon  my  mouth;  once  have  I 
spoken.  I  will  not  answer,  yea  twice,  but  I  will  proceed 
no  further."  The  Almighty  spoke  to  him  again.  Then 
Job  said,  "I  know  that  thou  canst  do  all  things,  that  no 
purpose  of  thine  can  be  thwarted.  You  ask  who  is  this 
that  hideth  counsel  without  knowledge?  I  am  the  man, 
but  therein  I  uttered  that  which  I  understood  not,  things 


156  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

too  wonderful  for  me  which  I  knew  not,  and  I  beseech 
thee  and  I  will  speak :  I  will  demand  of  thee,  and  declare 
thou  unto  me.  I  have  heard  of  thee  by  the  hearing  of 
the  ear:  but  now  mine  eye  seeth  thee.  Wherefore  I 
abhor  myself  and  repent  in  dust  and  ashes." 

Let  us  now  see  exactly  how  it  affected  Isaiah.  We 
find  it  in  Isaiah  6:5.  It  is  in  the  year  that  King  Uzziah 
died.  Here  is  how  it  affected  him :  "Then  I  said,  woe 
is  me,  for  I  am  undone,  because  I  am  a  man  of  unclean 
lips  and  I  dwell  in  the  midst  of  a  people  of  unclean  lips, 
for  mine  eyes  have  seen  the  King  Jehovah  of  hosts." 
I  repeat  the  statement  of  the  last  chapter,  that — 

Only  people  very  far  off  from  God  can  ever  appear 
unto  themselves  to  be  perfect  or  sinless. 

Those  very  near  to  God  always  behold  themselves  to 
be  vile  and  sinful.  A  garment  supposed  to  be  white,  ex- 
hibited in  a  dark  cellar,  may  seem  clean,  but  if  we  bring 
it  out  in  the  bright  light  of  day  we  can  see  how  spotted 
and  tarnished  it  is.  In  Daniel's  case,  three  of  his  senses 
— sight,  hearing,  and  touch — took  cognizance  of  this 
divine  vision.  In  mercy  this  King  of  Glory  strengthened 
and  cheered  Daniel  as  He  had  strengthened  and  cheered 
Isaiah  and  Ezekiel  before.  This  is  the  way  the  record 
puts  the  tenderness  of  the  divine  mercy  (tenth  chapter)  : 
"And,  behold,  a  hand  touched  me,  which  set  me  on  my 
knees  and  upon  the  palms  of  my  hands.  And  said  unto 
me,  O  Daniel,  thou  man  greatly  loved,  understand  the 
words  that  I  speak  unto  thee,  and  stand  upright ;  for 
unto  thee  am  I  now  sent.  And  when  He  had  spoken 
these  words  unto  me,  I  stood  trembling.  Then  He  said 
unto  me.  Fear  not,  Daniel ;  for  from  the  first  day  that 
thou  didst  set  thy  heart  to  understand,  and  to  humble 
thyself  before  thy  God,  thy  words  were  heard;  and  I 
am  come  for  thy  word's  sake."    The  Son  of  God  leaves 


VISION  OF  THE  SON  OF  GOD  157 

heaven  and  comes  to  earth  in  person  to  answer  prayer. 
He  continues :  "Now  I  am  come  to  make  thee  under- 
stand what  shall  befall  thy  people  in  the  latter  days ;  for 
the  vision  is  yet  for  many  days.  And  when  He  had 
spoken  unto  me  according  to  these  words,  I  set  my  face 
toward  the  ground  and  was  dumb.  And,  behold.  One  in 
the  likeness  of  the  Son  of  Man  touched  my  lips:  then 
I  opened  my  mouth,  and  spake  and  said  unto  Him  that 
stood  before  me,  Oh  my  Lord,  by  reason  of  the  vision 
my  sorrows  are  turned  upon  me,  and  I  retain  no  strength. 
For  how  can  the  servant  of  this  my  Lord  talk  with  this 
my  Lord  ?  for  as  for  me,  straightway  there  remained  no 
strength  in  me,  neither  was  there  breath  left  in  me.  Then 
there  touched  me  again  one  like  the  appearance  of  a  man, 
and  He  strengthened  me.  And  He  said,  O  man,  greatly 
beloved,  fear  not :  peace  be  unto  thee,  be  strong,  yea,  be 
strong.  And  when  he  spake  unto  me,  I  was  strength- 
ened, and  said,  Let  my  Lord  speak;  for  thou  hast 
strengthened  me."  How  tender  that  is !  How  sweet  the 
word!  And  notice  the  marvelous  touch  that  reached 
cut  and  took  hold  of  that  prostrate,  benumbed  man.  The 
first  touch  rouses  him  from  his  trance,  the  second  touch 
unseals  his  dumb  lips,  the  third  touch  gives  him  strength 
to  stand  before  God  and  talk  with  Him. 

We  come  now  to  a  doctrine  of  the  angels  hinted  at 
more  than  once  before  in  this  book: 

The  Ministry  of  the  Angels  in  Human  Governments: 
The  record  says,  "The  prince  of  the  kingdom  of  Persia 
withstood  me  one  and  twenty  days."  "You  have  been 
praying  one  and  twenty  days.  I  heard  you  when  you 
first  commenced  to  pray,  but  the  prince  of  the  kingdom 
of  Persia  withstood  me  one  and  twenty  days,  but,  lo, 
Michael,  one  of  the  chief  princes,  came  to  help  me  and  I 
remained  there  with  the  king  of  Persia."    Again  he  says, 


158  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

in  the  twentieth  and  twenty-first  verses :  "Then  said  he, 
Knowest  thou  wherefore  I  am  come  unto  thee?  And 
now  will  I  return  to  fight  the  prince  of  Persia:  and  when 
I  go  forth,  lo,  the  prince  of  Greece  shall  come.  And 
there  is  none  that  holdeth  with  me  against  thee  but 
Michael  your  prince,"  that  is,  of  all  the  angel  princes  of 
the  nations  there  was  only  one  to  stand  with  the  Son  of 
God,  and  that  was  the  angel  of  the  Jewish  nation  (chap- 
ter II,  verse  i)  :  "And  as  for  me,  in  the  first  year  of 
Darius  the  Mede,  I  stood  up  to  confirm  and  strengthen 
him."  This  language  on  its  face  teaches — 
^  (i)  That  Israel,  Persia,  and  Greece  had  each  an  angel 
who  was  charged  particularly  with  the  affairs  of  that 
nation,  and  implies  that  it  was  so  with  other  nations. 

(2)  That  these  national  angels  would  sometimes  with- 
stand each  other,  which  implies  that  the  conflicting  angels 
were  not  appointed  by  one  central  power,  else  they  would 
not  conflict. 

(3)  That  the  spiritual  world  is  the  background  of  the 
historical  world. 

(4)  That  over  the  conflicting  angels  was,  at  the  last 
analysis,  a  supreme  power  that  settled  the  conflictsV' 

The  higher  critics  contend : 

(i)  That  the  book  of  Daniel  makes  an  advance  in  the 
doctrine  of  angel  ministry  far  beyond  the  teaching  of 
the  preceding  Old  Testament  books. 

(2)  That  its  doctrine  of  a  guardian  angel  for  each 
nation  belongs  to  a  much  later  period,  namely,  the  Inter- 
Biblical  times,  or  early-Christian  times. 

To  which  it  may  be  answered:  That  an  advance  in 
doctrine  on  any  subject  is  characteristic  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. Doctrines  develop  and  are  elaborated  as  the  ages 
pass ;  for  example,  the  doctrine  of  the  Messiah.  But  it 
cannot  be  successfully  urged  that  any  teaching  of  Daniel 


VISION  OF  THE  SON  OF  GOD  159 

on  angel  ministration  is  out  of  harmony  with  the  teach- 
ing on  the  same  subject  in  either  the  Old  or  New  Testa- 
ment books.  The  Inter-Biblical  uninspired  books  only 
imitate  Daniel's  ideas,  but  have  not  his  discreet  reticence, 
and  betray  their  purely  human  origin  by  wild  extrava- 
gances. 

And  yet  the  advance  in  Daniel  on  this  subject  is  vastly 
overstated.  From  the  beginning  the  revelation  angel 
ministrations  appear  in  behalf  of  or  against  both  indi- 
viduals and  nations.  In  the  book  of  Job,  written,  as  I 
think,  by  Moses  in  Midian,  and  further,  as  I  think,  the 
first  Bible-book  written,  we  first  see  clearly  that  the 
spiritual  world  is  the  background  of  the  historical  world, 
and  that  there  are  angels  good  and  bad  touching  human 
affairs,  and  without  a  knowledge  of  which  we  could  not 
understand  the  age-long  problem  of  the  undeserved 
afflictions  of  the  righteous.  From  it  also  we  learn  the 
limitations  on  evil  angels,  their  subordination  to  one 
Supreme  Being,  who,  as  well  as  good  angels,  must  re- 
port statedly  to  Jehovah,  and  whose  evil  work  is  only 
permissive  and  temporary. 

From  Genesis  and  the  Psalms  we  learn  not  only  when, 
but  why  their  interest  in  the  history  of  men  began. 
Throughout  the  Old  Testament  history  they  touch  both 
the  individual  man  and  nations.  It  is  true  that  the  Sep- 
tuagint  translators  of  the  Pentateuch  attribute  the  first 
conception  of  national  angels  to  Moses,  rather  than 
Daniel,  in  their  rendering  of  Deut.  32 : 8 :  "He  set  the 
bounds  of  the  nations  according  to  the  number  of  the 
angels  of  God."  But  long  before  the  days  of  the  Septua- 
gint  translators  Isaiah  had  hinted  at  a  kindred  thought  to 
Daniel's  (Isa.  24:21). 
y  In  the  great  council  of  heaven,  both  good  and  evil 
spirits  present,  seen  by  the  prophet  Micaiah  (I  Kings  22: 


160  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

19-23),  an  evil  spirit  is  permitted  to  mislead  the  wicked 
Ahab  and  his  ally  as  to  the  issue  of  the  disastrous  battle 
of  Ramoth-Gilead.  Satan,  as  the  usurping  king  of  this 
world,  naturally  puts  his  angels  in  charge  of  heathen 
governments  and  through  them  moves  their  earthly  kings 
to  obstruct  the  progress  of  the  kingdom  of  God.  Super- 
natural forces  of  evil  were  back  of  Jannes  and  Jambres 
when  they  withstood  Moses.  A  basis  of  real  fact  under- 
lies the  perverted  idea  of  the  heathen,  that  each  nation 
or  city  had  its  special  deity.  In  Ezra  and  Nehemiah 
we  can  easily  see  the  human  forces  obstructing  the  prog- 
ress of  the  restoration  of  Jerusalem.  Edom,  Moab,  and 
Samaria,  through  their  mispresentations  at  the  Persian 
court,  repeatedly  blocked  the  way,  but  this  chapter  tells 
us  that  back  of  the  Edomites  and  Moabites  and  Samari- 
tans and  Persians  was  the  Devil,  and  the  angel  through 
whom  he  controlled  this  nation. 

QUESTIONS 

1.  What  the  theme  of  chapter  10? 

2.  What  the  relations  of  chapters  10,  11,  12  to  each  other? 

3.  What  the  date  of  the  vision? 

4.  What  its  occasion? 

5.  Why  does  Daniel  mourn,  fast  and  pray  so  long? 

6.  What  contention  of  the  critics  do  his  prayers  in  chapters 
9  and  10  refute? 

7.  Where  the  place  of  the  vision? 

8.  Who  present,  human  and  superhuman? 

9.  What  the  first  great  event  that  intervenes  between  chapters 
9  and  10? 

10.  Does  this  decree  prove  that  Cyrus  was  a  monotheist,  and 
how  do  you  prove  that  political  reasons  influenced  him? 

11.  What  the  second  intervening  event? 

12.  What  the  distinction  in  time  between  the  answer  to  this 
prayer  and  the  one  in  chapter  9,  and  why  the  delay  here? 

13.  What  similarity  in  the  cases  of  the  companions  of  Daniel 
and  Saul  at  the  time  of  their  visions? 

14.  State  the  likeness  between  the  visions  of  Daniel  and  John. 

15.  What  other  pre-manifestations  of  the  Son  of  God  in  this 
book  ? 


VISION  OF  THE  SON  OF  GOD  161 

16.  What  the  effect  of  the  vision  on  Daniel? 

17.  Compare  this  effect_  with  that  of  others,  in  both  Old  and 
New  Testament,  having  similar  visions. 

18.  What  great  lesson  does  this  teach? 

19.  What    four    great    lessons    on    angelology    deduced    from 
10:  13,  20  and  ii :  i? 

20.  State  the  contention  of  higher  critics  on  the  angelology  of 
the  book  of  Daniel,  and  your  reply. 

21.  Who  was  the  angel  of  the  Jewish  nation,  and  why  did  the 
angels  of  other  nations  oppose  him? 


XIII 

THE  FINAL  PROPHECIES  OF  THE  BOOK 
Scripture:    Dan.  ii :  1-12 :  13 

WE  now  come  to  the  last  discussion  on  the  book 
of  Daniel,  and  there  are  difficulties  in  interpret- 
ing the  last  two  chapters  of  this  book,  as  follows : 

1.  The  difficulty  in  determining  the  text  is  unusually 
great.  While  the  Hebrew  text  is  authoritative,  yet  the 
several  Greek  versions,  particularly  Septuagint  and 
Theodotion,  the  Syriac  Peshito,  and  the  Vulgate  (Latin) 
are  relied  on  in  aiding  to  determine  the  true  text.  These 
versions,  however,  on  these  chapters  do  in  some  instances 
complicate  rather  than  relieve  the  difficulties. 

2.  The  section  of  chapter  11  treating  of  the  "King  of 
the  South  and  the  King  of  the  North,"  and  extending 
from  verse  5  to  the  end  of  the  chapter,  introduces,  by 
far,  the  most  serious  difficulty  in  this,  that  most  com- 
mentators find  it  easy  to  refer  verses  5-32  to  the  con- 
flicts between  the  Syrian  and  Egyptian  divisions  of 
Alexander's  empire,  culminating  in  Antiochus  Epiphanes. 
But  no  commentator  is  able  to  apply  verses  36-45  to  that 
conflict  without  doing  great  violence  to  both  the  text 
and  to  history.  There  appears  to  be  in  verses  33-35,  if 
not  at  verse  21,  a  transition  to  events  more  remote,  and 
to  a  person  more  important  than  Antiochus  Epiphanes, 
and  directly  connected  with  the  final  resurrection  in  the 
beginning  of  the  twelfth  chapter.  So  that  in  general 
terms  we  have  three  theories  of  interpretation: 

162 


FINAL  PROPHECIES  163 

(a)  The  higher  critics,  plausibly  agreeing  from  the 
apparent  continuity  of  the  references  to  the  kings  of  the 
North  and  South  from  verse  5  to  the  end,  apply  the  whole 
section  to  the  wars  between  the  Seleucids  and  the  Ptol- 
emies. Their  only  escape  from  the  obvious  misfit  of  the 
latter  part  is  that  Daniel  was  himself  mistaken  in  that 
part,  and  also  our  Lord  and  His  apostles. 

(b)  Some  pre-millennialists,  particularly  Tregelles, 
seeing  plainly  the  misfit  of  the  latter  part  to  anything 
verifiable  in  the  history  of  the  Seleucids  and  Ptolemies, 
ignore  the  obvious  verification  in  the  first  part  and  deny 
any  reference  to  them  at  all  in  the  chapter. 

(c)  Other  interpreters  {e.g.,  Luther,  Calvin,  and  a 
host  of  other  Protestants)  accept  the  reference  of  the 
first  part  to  the  Seleucids  and  Ptolemies,  but  find  a  tran- 
sition about  verses  33-35  to  more  remote  events  and 
persons  connected  with  the  last  things  of  time.  This 
theory  is  by  far  the  best  of  the  three  in  harmonizing 
all  the  facts,  and  is  in  line  with  the  perspective  of  proph- 
ecy, which,  like  a  view  of  distant  mountains,  one  peak 
behind  another,  but  higher,  from  the  viewpoint  of  the 
beholder,  gives  a  blended  view  as  of  but  one  peak.  Only 
nearer  approach,  or  a  side  view  from  another  point  of 
observation,  reveals  the  distinction  in  the  peaks.  They 
cite  many  scriptural  illustrations — for  example,  the 
seventy-second  Psalm,  which  gives  a  blended  view  of 
Solomon  and  the  remote  Messiah  in  which  it  is  hard 
to  distinguish  just  what  parts  to  limit  to  Solomon  and 
what  parts  to  the  Messiah.  This  is  not,  strictly  speaking, 
giving  a  double  sense  to  the  meaning  of  words.  There 
has  never  been  but  one  objection,  worth  counting,  to  this 
theory — to  wit,  verse  40,  evidently  in  the  latter  part, 
names  the  king  of  the  South  and  the  king  of  the  North, 
as  if  plainly  a  continuation  of  the  first  part. 


164  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

3.  The  third  difficulty  in  the  interpretation  is  to  under- 
standingly  apply  the  time  numbers  1290  and  1335  in 
12:  II,  12. 

Now  let  us  take  up  the  interpretation  of  11 : 2-4.  The 
meaning  there  is  obvious:  It  is  not  in  the  author's  plan 
to  enumerate  all  the  kings  of  Persia,  but  the  number 
up  to  the  great  provocation,  which  led  to  a  union  of  the 
many  independent  Greek  states  into  one  empire,  and  to 
their  counter-invasion  of  Persia.  We  may  count  it  two 
ways: 

(i)  The  three  kings  to  arise  are  Cambyses,  the  son  of 
Cyrus,  not  so  friendly  to  the  Jews  as  his  father, 

(2)  The  Artaxerxes  of  Ezra  4:7,  who  was  the  im- 
postor, Gaumata,  the  pseudo-Smerdis,  reigning  only  seven 
months,  but  in  that  time  revoking  the  Cyrus  decree; 
Darius  Hystaspes,  who  renewed  the  Cyrus  decree  (Ezra 
6),  and  Xerxes  the  Great,  the  Ahasuerus  who  divorced 
Vashti  and  married  Esther  (see  book  of  Esther). 

Or  we  may  omit  the  impostor  and  make  Xerxes  the 
fourth,  including  Cyrus.  But  the  part  played  by  the 
impostor  in  Jewish  affairs  (Ezra  4)  favors  the  reten- 
tion of  him  as  one  of  the  three,  and  thus  making  Xerxes 
the  fourth  after  the  three  and  the  fifth,  including  Cyrus. 
Evidently  the  prophecy  lays  special  stress  on  Xerxes 
because  of  his  great  riches  and  because  of  his  stirring 
up  all  the  world  against  the  realms  of  Greece.  The  word 
realm  is  plural  in  the  versions,  referring  to  the  many 
Greek  states.  Every  schoolboy  is  familiar  with  the  his- 
tory of  Xerxes  the  Great,  whose  wealth  was  incalculable, 
who  stirred  up  the  world  to  invade  the  Grecian  states, 
whose  army  by  some  was  reckoned  5,000,000,  who  crossed 
the  Hellespont,  killed  Leonidas  of  Sparta  at  the  pass  of 
Thermopylae,  captured  Athens,  when  its  citizens  had  em- 
barked on  their  fleet,  who  was  disastrously  defeated  in 


FINAL  PROPHEaES  165 

the  naval  battle  of  Salamis  by  Themistocles,  and  whose 
bridge  of  boats  on  the  Hellespont  was  destroyed  by  a 
storm,  provoking  his  impotent  wrath  against  the  sea,  and 
his  having  the  sea  flogged  with  chains,  and  his  disgraceful 
return  to  his  own  land  (see  schoolboy  and  legislative 
oratory  on  Thermopylae,  and  Byron's  matchless  poem, 
"The  Isles  of  Greece,"  in  "Childe  Harold."  See  also 
Herodotus  VH  :  20-99 !  ^"d  "Rollin's  Ancient  History," 
for  his  immense  armament). 

We  are  not  to  understand  that  Xerxes,  except  under 
the  instigation  of  Haman,  was  unfriendly  to  the  Jews, 
but  he  is  made  prominent  here,  because  it  was  his  inva- 
sion that  led  largely  afterwards  to  the  unification  of  the 
Greek  states  under  Philip  of  Macedon,  with  a  view  to 
invade  Persia  in  return,  as  was  done  under  Philip's  son, 
Alexander  the  Great.  We  know  that  Alexander  justi- 
fied his  invasion  as  a  retaliation  for  the  Xerxes  invasion 
of  Greece,  and  so  this  prophecy  drops  all  reference  to 
later  Persian  kings  in  order  to  pass  to  the  rise  of  the 
third  great  monarchy.  The  great  king  of  verse  3  is 
Alexander,  and  in  verse  4  we  have  a  prophecy  of  the 
four-fold  division  of  his  kingdom  under  Cassander, 
Lysimachus,  Seleucus,  and  Ptolemy,  discussed  in  the 
exposition  of  the  eighth  chapter,  only  here  it  is  shown 
that  his  heirs  did  not  succeed  him,  nor  any  of  the  divi- 
sions equaled  his  dominion.  Diodorus  Siculus  tells  us 
that  Cassander  murdered  his  legitimate  son  by  his  queen 
Roxana,  named  Alexander  after  himself,  and  caused  to 
be  murdered  his  illegitimate  son,  Hercules. 

Antiochus  had  about  whipped  out  the  eastern  kings, 
had  conquered  all  Judea  and  Egypt  and  was  besieging 
Alexandria  when  some  ships  from  Chittim  came  into  the 
port,  and  history  tells  us  that  from  those  ships  came  the 
Roman  officer,  Pompilius,  and  said  to  Antiochus,  "Stop 


166  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

this  siege  and  go  home."  Antiochus  replied  that  he 
would  take  time  to  think  about  it.  The  Roman  general 
drew  a  circle  around  him  in  the  sand  with  a  stick,  and 
said,  "You  answer  before  you  get  out  of  that  ring,"  and 
he  answered.    That  is  a  new  detail. 

It  has  been  shown  in  previous  discussions  that  all  the 
prophetic  sections  in  the  book  after  the  first  are  but 
elaborations  of  the  first,  and  that  each  succeeding  one 
gives  some  details  of  some  one  of  the  five  empires  not 
previously  given.  In  chapter  8,  we  have  an  expansion  of 
'the  third  empire,  giving  an  account  of  its  fourfold 
division,  just  related,  and  particularly  showing  the  rise 
of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  the  little  horn,  in  the  latter 
days  of  the  third  empire,  so  now  let  us  consider  the  new 
details  of  this  empire,  given  in  ii :  5-32,  as  follows: 

1.  We  have  here,  verses  5-20,  and  not  elsewhere  in  the 
book,  the  details  of  the  long  series  of  conflicts  between 
the  kings  of  the  Syrian  and  Egyptian  divisions  of  Alex- 
ander's empire.  As  Judea  lies  directly  between  Syria 
and  Eg}'pt,  it  became  the  battle-ground  and  prey  of  the 
contending  armies,  passing  in  subjection  first  to  one,  then 
to  the  other,  as  the  fortunes  of  war  favored  one  or  the 
other.  The  historical  verification  of  these  verses  can  be 
found  in  any  commentary.  Driver,  in  "Cambridge  Bible 
Series,"  is  as  good  as  any  on  these  verses,  if  not  the 
best.    It  is  brief  and  clear. 

2.  Verse  21  reads  as  follows:  "And  in  his  estate  shall 
stand  up  a  vile  person,  to  whom  they  shall  not  give  the 
honour  of  the  kindom:  but  he  shall  come  in  peaceable, 
and  obtain  the  kingdom  by  flatteries."  Now  that  vile  or 
contemptible  person  is  where  we  commence  to  learn 
about  the  last  antichrist  of  the  Bible.  In  verses  21-32, 
if  they  refer  at  all  to  Antiochus  Epiphanes  (which  may 
be  questioned),  these  are  details  not  given  in  8:9-14, 


FINAL  PROPHECIES  167 

23-25  (which  unquesionably  refer  to  him).  Among 
these  details  are  (a)  the  reference  to  his  prodigal  gifts 
(verse  4),  (b)  his  check  by  the  Romans  (verse  30), 
(c)  the  varying  tides  of  his  war  with  Egypt. 

It  may  be  questioned  that  this  chapter  refers  at  all  to 
Antiochus  Epiphanes,  because — 

1.  The  eighth  chapter  has  already  given  details  of  his 
relations  to  the  third  empire  and  to  Israel,  and  is  there- 
fore less  necessary  here.  We  find  nowhere  else  in  the 
book  a  repetition  of  minute  details.  The  details  of  the 
war  between  the  Seleucids  and  Ptolemies  are  given  in  this 
chapter  because  not  elsewhere  given. 

2.  As  he,  the  little  horn  of  the  third  beast,  was  the 
first  antichrist,  and  as  the  little  horn  of  the  fourth  beast 
was  the  second  antichrist,  harmonizing  with  Rev.  13,  so 
this  chapter,  from  verse  21  to  the  end,  may  be  explained 
to  refer  to  the  last  antichrist,  harmonizing  with  Paul's 
Man  of  Sin  (II  Thess.  2:3-12)  who  lasts  to  the  final 
advent  here  (12:2)  as  in  Paul's  account.  It  is  certain 
that  verses  36-45  cannot  apply  to  Antiochus,  and  if  verses 
21-32  are  concerning  the  same  person,  then  the  transition 
to  the  last  things  commences  at  verse  21  and  not  at 
33-35,  according  to  the  third  theory  hereinbefore  set 
forth. 

3.  The  fact  that  there  is  an  abomination  of  desolation 
here  (verse  31  and  12:11,  as  well  as  in  8:11,  13,  14) 
does  not  prove  identity,  but  is  squarely  against  any  refer- 
ence here  to  Antiochus  for  the  following  reasons : 

(a)  The  abomination  of  desolation  in  9:26,  27  is  dif- 
ferent from  the  one  in  8:11,  13,  14,  as  our  Lord  in  His 
great  prophecy  clearly  shows   (Matthew  24:15;    Mark 

13:14)- 

(b)  The  abomination  of  desolation  here  (11:31  and 
12: 11)  are  not  the  same  as  8: 11,  13,  14,  because  the  time 


168  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

number,  2,300  days  of  the  eighth  chapter  is   different 
from  the  time  numbers  here,  1,290  and  1,335. 

(c)  Because  this  deliverance  connects  with  the  resur- 
rection and  judgment,  12:2. 

(d)  Because  John  in  Revelation  refers  Daniel's  "time, 
times  and  a  half  time"  as  well  as  the  great  oath  of  God 
(12:7)  to  a  point  of  time  yet  future  in  a.  d.  95. 

(e)  Because  some  things  foretold,  even  in  verse  21-32, 
cannot  be  verified  in  the  history  of  Antiochus,  and  none 
of  the  great  things  foretold  in  11:36-45  and  in  chap- 
ter 12. 

The  true  point  of  the  transition,  therefore,  to  the  last 
antichrist  commences  with  the  "vile  person"  (11:21) 
and  not  at  verses  33-35,  as  set  forth  in  the  third  theory. 

The  Resurrection  in  13:2 

1.  All  commentators,  radicals,  and  conservatives,  pre 
and  post-millennialists  agree  that  Daniel  here  refers  to 
a  real  and  final  resurrection  of  the  bodies  of  the  just  and 
the  unjust. 

2.  The  radical  critics  are  mistaken  in  using  this  to 
prove  a  late  origin  for  the  book  of  Daniel,  in  order  to 
account  for  the  development  of  the  doctrine.  As  our 
Lord  says  on  this  very  point  to  the  Sadducees,  who  were 
the  higher  critics  of  his  day,  "Ye  do  err,  not  knowing 
the  Scriptures,"  and  then  proves  that  the  Pentateuch 
taught  the  resurrection.  So  also  teaches  Isaiah  before 
Daniel's  time,  and  so  the  Psalms,  as  Peter  proved  at 
Pentecost.  And  so  Eze^iel  (chapter  37)  uses  the  resur- 
rection of  the  body  to  illustrate  the  spiritual  resurrection 
of  the  Jews. 

3.  The  Interpretation  of  Dan.  12:2  by  Tregelles,  the 
premillennialist,  separating  by  a  long  interval  the  resur- 


FINAL  PROPHECIES  169 

rection  of  the  just  from  that  of  the  unjust,  finds  no  sup- 
port in  any  text  or  version,  and  so  far  as  I  know  in  any 
great  commentary. 

The  curious  mind  wants  the  explanation  of  the  time 
numbers  1,290  and  1,335  ^"  ^^''^  twelfth  chapter.  Here 
the  Son  of  God  himself,  who  interprets  this  vision  to 
Daniel,  declines  to  answer  the  question,  bidding  Daniel 
go  his  way  and  wait  for  the  fulfillment  to  demonstrate 
its  meaning.  So  we  pass  on.  But  more  important  are 
the  great  pulpit  themes  in  this  book  as  suggested  by  it. 
Let  us  consider  a  few  of  them: 

The  supremacy  of  the  divine  government  over  indi- 
viduals and  nations  (Dan.  4:34  and  35)  :  "And  at  the 
end  of  the  days  I,  Nebuchadnezzar,  lifted  up  mine  eyes 
unto  heaven,  and  mine  understanding  returned  unto  me ; 
and  I  blessed  the  Most  High ;  and  I  praised  and  hon- 
oured Him  that  liveth  forever,  whose  dominion  is  an  ever- 
lasting dominion,  and  His  kingdom  is  from  generation  to 
generation ;  and  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth  are 
reputed  as  nothing:  as  He  doeth  according  to  His  will 
in  the  army  of  heaven,  and  among  the  inhabitants  of  the 
earth ;  and  none  can  stay  His  hand,  or  say  unto  Him, 
What  doest  thou?"  Now  that  is  a  great  text  on  the 
supremacy  of  God's  government  of  individuals  and 
nations. 

The  second  great  text  is  found  in  the  same  chapter: 
"Take  away  from  him  the  heart  of  a  man  and  give  him 
the  heart  of  a  beast."  And  that  is  the  theme  for  the 
agnostic,  the  one  who  can't  know  that  there  is  a  God  and 
that  He  ruleth  in  heaven.  He  classes  himself  with  the 
beast,  and  he  might  as  well  be  a  brute  and  go  out  and 
cat  grass  like  an  ox. 

Another  great  subject  Is  the  distinction  between  duty 
to  God  and  to  the  state,  based  on  Dan.  3 :  16-18:    "Shad- 


170  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 

rach,  Meshach,  and  Abed-nego  answered  and  said  to  the 
king,  O  Nebuchadnezzar,  we  are  not  careful  to  answer 
thee  in  this  matter.  If  it  be  so,  our  God,  whom  we  serve 
is  able  to  deliver  us  from  the  burning  fiery  furnace; 
and  He  will  deliver  us  out  of  thine  hand,  O  king.  But  if 
not,  be  it  known  unto  thee,  O  king,  that  we  will  not  serve 
thy  gods,  nor  worship  the  golden  image  which  thou  hast 
set  up."  Couple  that  with  what  is  said  of  Daniel  when 
he  knew  the  decree  was  signed  that  no  man  should  pray 
to  any  god  but  the  king  for  thirty  days,  in  the  sixth  chap- 
ter. He  went  to  his  room  and  prayed  as  his  custom  was 
and  he  prayed  three  times  a  day  just  as  he  had  done 
before.  Now  in  discussing  that  as  a  preacher  it  is 
important  to  show  that  when  human  government  clashes 
with  divine  government  we  must  make  the  law  of  God 
paramount :  "Render  unto  Caesar  'whatsoever  is  due 
Csesar,  but  render  unto  God  what  is  due  to  God." 

From  the  chapter,  3 :  24,  25 :  "Then  Nebuchadnezzar, 
the  king,  was  astonished,  and  rose  up  in  haste,  and  spake, 
and  said  unto  his  counsellors,  did  not  we  cast  three  men 
bound  into  the  midst  of  the  fire?  They  answered  and 
said  unto  the  king.  True,  O  king.  He  answered  and 
said,  Lo,  I  see  four  men  loose,  walking  in  the  midst  of 
the  fire,  and  they  have  no  hurt;  and  the  form  of  the 
fourth  is  like  the  Son  of  God."  Now  the  great  theme 
there  is  the  presence  of  God  with  His  people  in  their 
afflictions. 

Another  theme  is  the  patriotism  of  Daniel  or  his  love 
for  his  people  as  set  forth  in  his  prayer  in  the  ninth  chap- 
ter and  in  his  three  weeks'  prayer  in  the  tenth  chapter. 
Another  great  theme  is  the  Messiah  in  the  book  of 
Daniel,  first  in  the  coming  of  His  kingdom,  chapter  2. 
Second,  his  great  expiation,  chapter  9:25,  and  third,  the 
pre-manifestation,  chapter   10;  fourth,  the  presence  of 


FINAL  PROPHECIES  171 

the  Lord  with  His  people  in  their  afflictions,  the  text  I 
have  just  given;  fifth,  in  His  exaltation  after  His  expia- 
tion, chapter  7,  and  sixth,  in  His  final  advent  for  resur- 
rection and  judgment,  chapter  12.  A  great  theme  for 
the  preacher  is,  "The  Messiah  as  Presented  in  the  Book 
of  Daniel."  Another  great  theme  is  the  several  anti- 
christs and  the  several  abominations  of  desolation.  First, 
Antiochus  Epiphanes,  the  little  horn  of  the  third  beast, 
and  the  abomination  is  the  setting  up  of  the  statue  of 
Jupiter  and  the  sacrificing  of  a  hog  on  the  altar.  Then 
the  abomination  in  the  ninth  chapter  fulfilled  at  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  in  the  effigy  of  the  Roman 
Emperor  on  the  standards  of  the  soldiers.  The  second 
antichrist  is  the  little  horn  of  the  fourth  beast  and  the 
abomination  of  desolation  that  he  sets  up  in  claiming  to 
be  God  and  demanding  worship  of  men.  The  third  anti- 
christ, the  atheistic,  world-ruler  who  comes  just  before 
the  millennium,  and  then  the  last  antichrist,  the  same  as 
Paul's  Man  of  Sin  who  will  be  destroyed  at  the  coming 
of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  and  his  abomination  will  be 
that  he  himself  will  claim  to  be  the  returned  Messiah, 
the  king,  in  his  final  advent  and  demand  to  be  worshipped. 
Several  other  themes  are  found  in  the  book,  viz. :  The 
Influence  of  a  Great  Man,  and  of  his  Book  on  After 
Ages,  The  Wisdom  and  the  Righteousness  of  Daniel  as 
Seen  by  Ezekiel,  Keep  Thy  Window  Open  Toward  Jeru- 
salem When  You  Pray,  and  "They  That  be  Wise  Shall 
Shine  as  the  Firmament,  and  They  That  Turn  Many  to 
Righteousness  as  the  Stars  Forever." 


17«  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL 


QUESTIONS 

1.  What  the  first  difficulty  in  interpreting  the  last  two  chapters 
of  Daniel,  and  what  aids  to  its  solution? 

2.  What  the  second  difficulty,  and  what  the  three  theories  of 
interpretation  in  this  connection? 

3.  What  the  third  difficulty? 

4.  On  II :  2-4  answer: 

(i)     Who  were  the  four  kings  of  Persia  here  mentioned? 

(2)  How  does  Xerxes  fill  the  description  of  the  4tli? 

(3)  Who  the  mighty  king  that  should  stand  up  and  rule,  and 
how  does  history  prove  that  he  fulfills  the  conditions  here  stated 
relative  to  his  kingdom? 

5.  Relate  the  incident  of  Pompilius  and  Antiochus  Epiphanes. 

6.  What  the  new  details  of  this  empire  given  in  11 :  S-32? 

7.  Show  the  historical  fulfillment  of  11:5-20. 

8.  What  question  is  raised  with  reference  to  11:21-32? 

9.  If  this  passage  refers  to  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  what  the 
details? 

TO.  Why  may  it  be  questioned  that  this  chapter  refers  at  all  to 
Antioclnis  Epiphanes? 

11.  What  of  the  resurrection  in  Dan.   12:2? 

12.  What  is  the  explanation  of  the  time  numbers  1290  and 
1335  in  the  12th  chapter? 

13.  What  the  great  pulpit  themes  of  this  book  as  suggested 
by  it? 


XIV 
THE   INTER-BIBLICAL    PERIOD 

Introduction 

WE  commence  this  study  with  an  introduction  to 
the  period.  The  Old  Testament  books  written 
during  the  Babylonian  exile  are,  part  of  Jere- 
miah, all  of  Ezekiel,  all  of  Daniel,  and  possibly  a  few  of 
the  Psalms.  The  Old  Testament  books  written  after  the 
Jews'  return  from  the  Babylonian  captivity  are  the  fol- 
lowing, in  their  order,  as  stated:  Haggai,  Zechariah, 
Ezra,  Esther,  Nehemiah,  Malachi — Nehemiah  and  Mal- 
achi  having  been  written  about  the  same  time.  The  Old 
Testament  closes,  then,  about  b.  c.  433  with  the  books 
of  Nehemiah  and  Malachi. 

The  extent  of  the  period  between  the  two  Testaments, 
the  Old  and  the  New,  in  round  numbers,  is  over  400  years, 
that  is,  from  b.  c.  433  to  b.  c.  4,  the  true  date  of  Christ's 
birth,  four  years  before  the  time  it  is  usually  given.  We 
may  learn  the  history  of  that  400  years :  First,  from  the 
Jewish  historian,  Josephus,  "Jewish  Antiquities,"  and  the 
first  part  of  his  "Wars  of  the  Jews."  Josephus  was  a 
Jewish  general  in  the  war  which  led  to  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  under  Titus,  living  forty  and  more  years  after 
Christ  died.  Second,  from  a  radical  critic,  Ewald,  who 
has  written,  perhaps,  the  most  remarkable  history  of  the 
Jewish  people.  I  do  not  very  well  see  how  we  could  do 
•without   it   on   account    of    its    great   scholarship   and 

173 


174  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

research,  though  many  things  in  it  cannot  possibly  be 
accepted  on  account  of  his  radical  criticisms.  One  vol- 
ume of  his  history  is  devoted  to  this  period.  As  that 
book  may  not  be  accessible,  I  mention  "Stanley's  Jewish 
Church,"  the  third  volume.  He  is  something  of  a  rad- 
ical critic  himself,  and  follows  Ewald  just  about  as 
closely  as  Dr.  Boyce,  in  his  theology,  follows  Hodge. 
But  better  than  all  of  them  for  brevity  and  clearness  is 
a  little  book  of  the  Temple  Series  of  the  Bible,  entitled, 
"Connection  Between  Old  and  New  Testaments."  The 
author  is  Rev.  George  Milne  Rea.  This  is  the  shortest, 
clearest,  and  most  forcible  history  of  the  period  that  I 
know  anything  about.  He  is  somewhat  of  a  radical 
critic,  but  there  is  little  poison  in  it. 

Then,  for  a  great  part  of  the  period,  we  find  I  and  H 
Maccabees  indispensable.  They  are  apocryphal  books  of 
the  Old  Testament.  The  first  book  of  the  Maccabees  is 
good,  great,  and  spiritual.  It  is  a  fine  history.  It  is  not 
an  inspired  book,  but  many  uninspired  books  are  very 
valuable.  I  have  been  reading  the  first  book  of  Macca- 
bees ever  since  I  was  ten  years  old.  The  second  book  of 
Maccabees  is  also  good,  but  not  quite  so  reliable. 

Daniel's  prophecies  concerning  the  Persian,  Grecian, 
and  Roman  Empires,  while  prophecies  are  really  a  fore- 
cast of  all  the  history  there  is  on  the  subject. 

I  will  sum  up  the  histories  of  the  period :  ist,  Daniel ; 
2nd,  Josephus;  3rd,  Ewald's  "History  of  the  Jewish 
People";  4th,  "Stanley's  Jewish  Church";  5th,  Milne 
Rea's  "Connection  Between  the  Testaments" ;  6th,  I  and 
II  Maccabees.  In  giving  these  histories  let  me  say  that 
Josephus  on  that  period  sometimes  gives  the  chronology 
wrong — in  one  instance  at  least  a  hundred  years.  The 
ancient  Greek  historians  Herodotus,  Xenophon,  Polybius, 
Appianus,  Arrianus,  and  others,  touched  on  the  period. 


INTRODUCTION  175 

The  ancient  Roman  historians,  Livy,  Tacitus,  Diodorus, 
and  others,  touch  the  period.  The  great  modern  his- 
tories of  ancient  times  which  cover  the  period  are  RolHn, 
"RawHnson's  Monarchies,"  Grotes'  "History  of  Greece," 
and  Mommsen's  "History  of  Rome." 

We  next  notice  the  Jewish  Hterature  during  this 
period,  i.  e.,  what  the  Jews  wrote  during  this  period. 
We  get  the  hterature  of  this  period  to  find  out  how  the 
people  were  thinking,  to  what  their  minds  were  being 
given.  A  large  part  of  that  literature  appears  in  the  Sep- 
tuagint  Old  Testament,  and  is  incorporated  in  the  Roman 
Catholic  Bible.  In  our  Bible  the  Roman  Catholics  make 
their  insertions  of  the  Jewish  literature  as  follows :  First, 
just  after  Nehemiah  they  put  in  two  books,  Tobit  and 
Judith,  neither  one  of  them  historically  good,  and  a  good 
deal  of  Tobit  is  exceedingly  silly ;  second,  to  the  book  of 
Esther  they  add  ten  verses  to  the  tenth  chapter,  and 
then  add  six  more  chapters.  That  these  additions  were 
written  in  this  period,  and  after  the  inspiration  closed, 
is  evident  from  the  reading  of  them.  Third,  just  after 
the  Song  of  Solomon,  they  put  two  Apocryphal  books. 
Wisdom  and  Ecclesiasticus.  These  books,  while  not 
inspired,  make  very  good  reading,  but  they  are  written, 
as  I  said,  in  that  interval  between  the  two  Testaments, 
and  rather  late  in  that  interval.  Fourth,  just  after  the 
Lamentations  of  Jeremiah,  they  put  the  book  of  Baruch. 
Baruch  himself  was  the  scribe  of  Jeremiah  and  a  good 
man.  This  book,  some  of  it,  is  exceedingly  silly,  and  evi- 
dently not  written  by  Baruch. 

To  our  book  of  Daniel  they  make  the  following  addi- 
tions: When  Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abed-nego  were 
cast  into  the  fiery  furnace,  they  put  a  long  song  of  about 
sixty-six  verses  into  the  mouth  of  these  three  men,  and 
make  them  sing  it  in  that  furnace.     At  the  end  of  the 


176  THE  INTER-BIBLlCAL  PERIOD 

book  of  Daniel  they  put  two  stories:  The  story  of 
Susanna,  and  the  story  of  Bel  and  the  Dragon — good 
stories  to  tell  the  children.  Sixth,  just  after  Malachi  they 
put  I  and  II  Maccabees. 

The  Romanist  Bible,  Douay  Version,  has  these  addi- 
tions and  shows  just  where  they  come  in.  All  these 
books  were  written  during  the  period  of  which  I  speak, 
and  in  addition  to  them  the  following  which  do  not 
appear  in  the  Romanist  Bible:  ist,  the  Prayer  of  Manas- 
seh.  He  was  the  wicked  son  of  the  good  king,  Hezekiah, 
and  the  record  states  that  when  he  was  a  captive  in 
Babylon  he  repented  and  prayed  to  God  to  forgive  him. 
It  occurred  to  one  of  these  Inter-Biblical  Jews  to  write 
out  that  prayer  for  him.  It  is  a  splendid  prayer  and  I 
do  not  see  anything  wrong  in  it. 

Seventh,  a  letter  from  Jeremiah  to  the  Babylonian 
exiles.  He  had  written  one  that  we  find  in  the  book  of 
Jeremiah,  but  this  is  falsely  attributed  to  Jeremiah.  Then, 
during  that  period,  they  wrote  certain  Psalms  and 
attributed  them  to  Solomon,  calling  them  The  Psalms  of 
Solomon.    Most  of  these  are  good  reading. 

But  the  greatest  exploit  of  the  Jewish  mind  during 
the  period  of  which  I  speak  was  the  translation  of  the 
Old  Testament  into  Greek,  the  Septuagint  version.  I 
will  have  a  good  deal  to  say  about  it  later. 

I  did  not  include  in  that  period  two  other  books  written 
by  Jews,  and  sometimes  classed  in  the  period.  One  is 
the  book  of  Enoch.  That  is  an  apocalypse,  an  imitation 
of  Daniel,  and  a  good  deal  like  Revelation.  Some  of  it 
is  fine  reading.  It  is  barely  possible  that  part  of  it  was 
written  before  Christ  was  born,  but  it  cannot  be  proven. 
The  other  book  is  I  and  II  Esdras.  They  were  certainly 
written  after  Christ,  both  of  them,  and  it  is  not  yet 
clear  whether  a  Christian  Jew  wrote  them  or  an  unchris- 


INTRODUCTION  177 

tian  Jew,  but  they  are  intolerable  stuff,  no  matter  who 
wrote  them, 

I  will  now  restate  the  literature  of  that  period.  I 
called  attention  to  the  part  of  the  literature  incorporated 
in  the  Romanist  Bible,  the  following  books  in  their 
order:  Tobit,  Judith,  Ecclesiasticus,  Baruch,  I  and  II 
Maccabees,  then  the  additions  to  Esther  and  Daniel. 
Apart  from  what  is  incorporated  in  the  Romanist  Bible 
I  gave  these:  The  Prayer  of  Manasseh,  the  Psalms  of 
Solomon,  the  letter  of  Jeremiah,  the  great  work  of  trans- 
lating the  Old  Testament  into  the  Greek  language — the 
Septuagint.  That  commenced  about  250  years  before 
Christ,  and  it  was  about  a  hundred  years  before  all  of  it 
was  done. 

The  King  of  Persia  at  the  time  the  Old  Testament 
closed  was  Artaxerxes  Longimanus,  and  the  book  that 
mostly  influenced  the  Jewish  thought  and  hope  during 
that  period  of  400  years  was  unquestionably  the  book 
of  Daniel.  Revelation  is  the  quickening  book  of  the 
New  Testament,  as  Daniel  was  the  quickening  book  to 
the  Jewish  mind,  both  of  them  apocalypses. 

There  are  nine  great  preceding  events  which  influenced 
this  period  of  400  years,  as  follows : 

(i)  The  first  event  was  'J22  b.  c.  Sargon,  king  of 
Assyria,  reigning  at  Nineveh,  captured  the  capital  of  the 
Northern  kingdom,  the  kingdom  of  the  ten  tribes, 
deported  the  inhabitants  into  the  far  East,  and  colonized 
their  territory  with  heathen  people  from  his  own  realm. 
As  we  go  on,  not  only  up  to  Christ,  but  beyond  Christ, 
we  will  see  the  tremendous  significance  of  that  mixed 
population  in  Samaria — a  heathen  population  settled  there 
to  take  the  place  of  the  deported  Jews,  intermarrying 
with  the  remnant  of  Israelites  left  behind,  and  consti- 
tuting what  later  was  called  the  Samaritan  people. 


178  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

(2)  The  second  great  event  was  in  587  b.  c.  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, king  of  Babylon,  captured  and  destroyed 
Jerusalem,  the  capital  of  the  lower  kingdom,  the  kingdom 
of  Judah,  and  deported  the  best  and  most  influential  of 
the  inhabitants  to  Babylon.  All  through  the  period  comes 
the  echo  of  that  event. 

(3)  The  third  great  preceding  event  was  in  538  B.C. 
Cyrus,  king  of  the  Medo-Persian  Empire,  captures  Baby- 
lon, and  in  b.  c.  536,  two  years  later,  he  issued  a  decree 
allowing  the  Jewish  captives  in  Babylon,  so  many  as 
wished  to  do  it,  to  go  back  to  their  own  country,  instruct- 
ing them  to  rebuild  their  temple,  which  Nebuchadnezzar 
had  destroyed.  This  event,  as  we  will  find,  was  mighty 
in  influencing  the  Inter-Biblical  period  in  several  respects. 
Heretofore  the  fortunes  of  the  people  of  Israel  had  been 
influenced  by  the  Hamitic  and  Semitic  nations,  who  held 
them  in  subjection.  Henceforward  it  is  the  Japhetic 
nations  that  affect  them.  The  Medo-Persians  were  de- 
scendants of  Japhet.  The  Babylonians  and  Assyrians 
were  descendants  of  Shem,  as  were  also  the  Ammonites, 
the  Moabites,  and  the  Esau-ites.  The  people  of  Egypt 
were  the  descendants  of  Ham,  and  so  were  the  Canaan- 
ites,  including  the  Philistines  and  Phoenicians.  Now, 
with  the  coming  of  Cyrus  to  Babylon  the  nations  to  affect 
the  Jews  are  the  descendants  of  Japhet. 

The  second  respect,  and  a  very  remarkable  one,  was 
that  the  policy  of  Assyria  and  Babylon  had  been  to  de- 
port the  inhabitants  of  the  countries  that  they  conquered 
and  colonize  them  elsewhere.  That  had  been  the  settled 
policy.  The  policy  of  Cyrus  was  exactly  the  opposite — 
to  send  all  the  exiles  home,  when  conquering  any  people. 
Cyrus  was  not  a  Persian,  but  an  Elamite,  and  hence  not 
a  monotheist,  but  a  polytheist.  He  was  a  great  man. 
A  heathen,  while  he  did  not  know  God,  God  knew  him. 


INTRODUCTION  179 

and  God  raised  him  up  to  do  the  work  that  he  did.  As 
Isaiah  prophesied,  "God  says,  I  will  raise  up  and  guide 
Cyrus,  though  he  knows  me  not."  He  not  only  sent  home 
those  of  the  Jews  that  wanted  to  go,  but  any  other  captive 
nation. 

The  third  respect  was  the  policy  of  all  the  Hamitic 
and  Semitic  nations  that  when  they  conquered  the  people 
of  Israel  they  destroyed  their  religion.  Cyrus'  policy 
was  exactly  the  opposite;  he  did  not  want  to  interfere 
with  the  religion  of  any  conquered  people.  He  even 
sent  back  all  the  captured  idols  in  Babylon  and  sent  the 
people  back  to  their  native  land.  He  sent  the  Jews  back 
and  gave  them  all  the  temple  vessels,  the  sacred  vessels 
of  the  sanctuary.  No  Persian  king  ever  interfered  with 
the  religion  of  a  conquered  nation.  At  no  time  during 
the  subjection  of  the  Jews  to  the  Persians,  while  they 
controlled  the  political  end,  did  they  interfere  with  their 
consciences.  They  let  them  worship  God  in  their  own 
way. 

The  fourth  respect  was  that  the  Medo-Persian  policy 
allowed  a  Jew,  who  was  qualified,  to  be  local  governor, 
subject  to  the  satrap  who  controlled  a  district,  and  was 
like  a  viceroy.  The  king  appointed  him  and  he  had  a 
great  district  under  him.  For  instance,  the  district  of 
Syria  was  ruled  by  a  satrap,  with  headquarters  at  Da- 
mascus, but  Judea  was  one  province  of  this  district  whose 
local  governor  might  be  a  Jew;  and  we  know  of  two 
distinguished  Jews  who  were  local  governors ;  Zerub- 
babel  was  one — he  was  the  first  one,  who  belonged  to 
the  line  of  David.  He  was  not  made  king,  but  was  the 
local  governor  over  all  the  territory  reoccupied  by  the 
Jews.  The  high  priest,  with  a  council  of  elders,  attended 
to  the  religious  matters.  Nehemiah  also  was  a  local 
governor,  but  I  do  not  know  that  any  other  Jew  was 


180  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

local  governor  during  that  period.  It  is  somewhat 
doubtful,  from  an  expression  in  Nehemiah  and  one  in 
Malachi,  but  those  two  were  permitted  to  rule  in  civil 
matters. 

(4)  The  fourth  great  event  that  afTected  the  Inter- 
Biblical  period  was  in  535  b.  c,  when  nearly  50,000  Jews 
returned  to  their  own  country  with  Zerubbabel  as  gov- 
ernor and  Joshua  as  high  priest,  with  orders  to  rebuild 
their  own  temple  and  worship  God  according  to  their  old 
forms.  The  question  has  often  been  asked  why  no  more 
returned.  There  were  42,000  and  some  hundreds,  be- 
sides some  seven  or  eight  thousand  servants  and  some 
singing  people,  but  less  than  50,000  Jews  accepted  the 
privilege  conferred  by  Cyrus.  One  reason  that  the  num- 
ber was  so  small  is  that  they  would  not  allow  anybody 
to  go  back — the  Jews  would  not — who  could  not  prove 
his  genealogy — his  pure  descent  by  the  genealogical 
tables.  His  pedigree  had  to  be  traceable  all  the  way 
back  to  Abraham.  That  let  out  a  good  many  of  them. 
Now,  as  less  than  50,000  of  them  returned,  that  brings 
us  to  a  new  word,  "diaspora,"  the  dispersion.  The  Jews 
who  remained,  from  that  time  on  till  now,  are  called  the 
dispersion.  We  find  that  language  repeated  in  the  New 
Testament.  James  and  Peter  both  write  letters  to  the 
dispersion. 

(5)  The  fifth  great  event  was  that  these  Samaritans, 
not  being  permitted  to  help  rebuild  the  temple,  though 
claiming  that  they  worshipped  Jehovah,  became  bitter 
enemies  to  its  rebuilding.  Zerubbabel  and  Joshua  were 
not  counting  numbers,  but  wanted  a  pure  and  homo- 
geneous people.  The  Samaritans  were  a  mixed  race, 
and  they  refused  to  allow  them  to  be  associated  in  the 
work,  whereupon  they  wrote  letters  back  to  Persia,  mak- 
ing all  sorts  of  accusations  against  the  Jews,  and  finally 


INTRODUCTION  181 

securing  an  order  for  a  discontinuance  of  the  work  of 
rebuilding  the  temple,  and  held  it  suspended  for  fifteen 
years,  until  a  new  Persian  dynasty  received  letters  from 
the  Jews  asking  him  to  search  the  records  of  the  reign 
of  Cyrus  and  see  if  he  could  not  find  that  decree  allow- 
ing the  Jews  to  rebuild  their  temple.  Darius  did  have 
the  records  searched,  and  did  find  it,  and  he  used  a  pretty 
strong  hand  to  help  the  Jews,  and  told  them  to  go  on 
with  the  building  of  their  temple.  So,  protected  by  him, 
the  temple  was  completed  and  dedicated  in  the  year  516 
B.  c.  The  rebuilding  of  that  temple,  the  re-establishing 
of  the  old  Jewish  worship,  can  hardly  be  over-estimated 
as  an  event  bearing  on  the  period  we  are  discussing. 

(6)  The  sixth  great  preceding  event  was  in  b.  c.  478. 
Esther,  a  Jewess  of  the  dispersion,  living  in  Babylon, 
became  the  wife  of  Xerxes  the  Great,  he  who  is  called 
Ahasuerus  in  the  book  of  Esther.  She  became  his  wife 
and  saved  the  Jews  of  the  dispersion  from  being  de- 
stroyed by  Haman.  That  Ahasuerus,  the  husband  of 
Esther,  is  the  very  Xerxes  that  invaded  Greece  with  so 
great  an  army,  but  that  was  before  he  married  Esther. 
I  will  tell  all  about  it  in  a  later  chapter  in  showing  the 
struggle  between  Greece  and  Persia.  The  war  really 
commenced  under  Darius  Hystaspis,  and  just  about  the 
time  that  Darius  was  having  that  temple  completed  he 
sent  the  Persian  soldiers  to  fight  the  battle  of  Marathon, 
just  outside  the  city  of  Athens,  in  which  they  were  in- 
gloriously  defeated.  When  Xerxes  the  Great  came  to  the 
throne,  he  led  an  army  of  over  two  million  people  against 
the  Greeks.  At  the  pass  of  Thermopylae,  Leonidas  and 
his  three  hundred  Spartans  died  fighting  for  Greece. 
Then  in  the  great  battle  of  Plataea  his  land  forces  were 
terribly  defeated.  When  Attica  was  invaded,  Themis- 
tocles  caused  the  Athenians  to  take  to  their  ships  and  let 


182  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

the  city  be  burned,  and  on  the  sea  he  fought  and  won  the 
great  battle  of  Salamis. 

(7)  The  seventh  great  event  was  in  B.C.  458,  when 
Ezra  leads  another  caravan  of  Jewish  exiles  to  Jerusalem. 
This  was  in  the  reign  of  Artaxerxes  Longimanus.  He 
was  reigning  when  the  Old  Testament  closed.  This  was 
by  far  the  most  influential  factor  in  the  future  of  the 
Jews ;  indeed,  with  Ezra  comes  the  rise  of  Judaism.  The 
people  are  called  Jews  from  his  time  on.  The  great  fac- 
tors of  Ezra's  coming  were:  First,  he  brought  back  a 
copy  of  the  Mosaic  law,  the  Pentateuch ;  second,  with 
him  commenced  that  remarkable  body  of  people  called 
the  scribes.  Ezra  was  a  notable  scribe.  They  were  the 
publishers  of  the  Bible,  not  indeed  by  printing,  but  they 
multiplied  the  manuscript  copies  of  it.  We  may  credit 
the  publication  of  the  Old  Testament  to  Ezra  and  the 
scribes.  These  scribes,  by  giving  the  people  copies  of 
their  Bible,  had  more  to  do  with  the  great  advance  in 
the  period  of  400  years  that  I  am  going  to  tell  about 
than  anything  else. 

With  Ezra  also  commenced  the  Jewish  Council  of 
Elders,  which  afterwards  became  the  Sanhedrin,  so  well 
known  in  New  Testament  times.  With  Ezra's  return 
from  Babylon  came  also  the  synagogue,  and  of  all  the 
potential  things  that  preserved  the  Jewish  faith  from  that 
time  on  the  synagogue  takes  the  lead.  Up  to  that  time 
they  were  temple-ritualists.  Theirs  was  a  sacrificial  wor- 
ship. From  now  on,  wherever  three  or  four  Jews  could 
be  found  in  a  place,  they  would  establish  a  "proseuche," 
or  prayer-chapel,  like  the  one  that  Paul  found  at 
Philippi. 

Where  there  were  more  of  them  they  established  a 
synagogue.  The  synagogue  is  not  a  temple,  but  it  is  a 
place  of  public  worship.  Every  Sabbath  day,  throughout 


INTRODUCTION  183 

the  world,  they  come  up  to  these  synagogues  and  read  a 
part  of  the  law,  and  a  part  of  the  prophets,  and  a  part 
of  the  other  writings,  and  then  expound  them  just  as  a 
preacher  now  reads  a  portion  of  the  scriptures  and  ex- 
pounds it.  Then,  that  synagogue  was  a  popular  assem- 
bly. For  the  first  time,  anybody  in  the  audience  that 
wanted  to,  could  get  up  and  say  what  was  in  his  mind. 
When  Christ  went  to  the  synagogue  at  Nazareth,  they 
handed  him  the  lesson  to  be  read  that  day.  He  read  it 
and  expounded  it.  When  Paul  entered  a  synagogue,  the 
leader  said  to  him,  seeing  he  was  a  visitor,  a  stranger, 
"Brother,  if  you  have  anything  to  say,  say  on."  It  was 
of  tremendous  importance  that  the  people  should  have 
Bibles  and  places  of  worship.  The  synagogue  more  nearly 
embodies  the  idea  of  a  New  Testament  church  than 
the  temple  does,  and  in  the  Greek  Old  Testament,  it  is 
sometimes  called  "ecclesia."  With  the  return  of  Ezra, 
idolatry  by  the  Jews  died  forever.  Up  to  that  time  God 
had  scourged  them  continually  with  other  nations  be- 
cause of  their  idolatry.  But  from  the  time  of  Ezra 
throughout  all  their  history  to  this  very  hour  in  which  I 
write,  no  Jew  has  been  an  idolator;  they  ceased  to  wor- 
ship idols.  Well  might  the  Jews  call  Ezra  the  second 
Moses. 

(9)  The  ninth,  and  last,  great  antecedent  event  is  this : 
In  B.  c.  445  Nehemiah,  the  cupbearer  to  Artaxerxes 
Longimanus,  asked  to  be  appointed  governor  of  Judea, 
and  the  Persian  king,  who  loved  him  very  much,  made 
him  governor.  The  Babylonians  would  call  him  "Pek- 
her,"  the  Turks  would  call  him  "Pasha,"  the  Persian 
would  say,  "Tirshathe,"  but  we  say  "governor."  Nehe- 
miah caused  a  wall  to  be  built  around  Jerusalem  to  pro- 
tect it  from  the  Samaritans  and  Arabians,  and  their 
other  enemies  close  by,  and  after  staying  12  years  he 


184  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

returned  to  Persia.  He  remained  there  a  while,  then 
came  back  and  served  as  governor  until  b.  c.  433. 

I  will  briefly  repeat  these  great  events:  ist,  the  de- 
struction of  the  ten  tribes  by  Sargon  in  b.  c.  722;  2nd, 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  Nebuchadnezzar  in  b.  c. 
587 ;  3rd,  the  destruction  of  Babylon  by  Cyrus,  king  of 
the  Persians,  in  b.  c.  538,  and  the  marvelous  advantages 
of  his  policy;  4th,  in  b.  c.  535,  fifty  thousand  Jews  re- 
turned with  Zerubbabel  as  governor  and  Joshua  as  high 
priest:  5th,  the  Samaritans  opposed  the  building  of  the 
temple  and  obstructed  it  for  15  years;  6th,  Darius  Hys- 
taspis,  the  head  of  the  second  Persian  Dynasty,  in  b.  c. 
516,  ordered  the  finishing  of  the  temple;  7th,  Esther  be- 
came Queen  of  Persia,  b.  c.  478;  8th,  b.  c.  458,  Ezra 
led  another  caravan  to  Jerusalem;  9th,  Nehemiah  was 
made  political  governor. 

We  have  now  before  us  the  books  of  the  Bible  that 
were  written  in  exile,  the  books  of  the  Bible  written 
after  the  exile,  the  histories  that  cover  this  period,  the 
literature  of  the  Jews  during  this  period,  and  the  great 
antecedent  events  influencing  this  period. 


QUESTIONS 

1.  What   O.   T.   books   were   written   during  the   Babylonian 
exile? 

2.  What  O.  T.  books  were  written  after  the  Jews'  return  from 
the  Babylonian  captivity? 

3.  What  then  the  extent  of  the  period  between  the  two  Testa- 
ments ? 

4.  From  what  books  may  we  learn  the  history  of  this  period? 

5.  What  Jewish  literature  written  during  this  period? 

6.  Who  was  king  of  Persia  at  the  close  of  the  O.  T.  canon? 

7.  What  book  mostly  influenced  the  Jewish  thought  and  hope 
during  the  Inter-Biblical  period? 

8.  What  the  first  great  preceding  event  which  influenced  this 
period  and  how? 

9.  What  the  second,  and  how? 


INTRODUCTION  185 

10.  What  the  third,  and  in  what  four  respects  was  it  aiighty 
in  infliiencing  this  period? 

11.  Whnt  the  fourth,  and  how? 

12.  What  the  fifth,  and  how? 

13.  What  the  sixth,  and  how? 

14.  What  the  seventh,  and  how? 

15.  What  the  eighth,  and  how? 

16.  What  the  ninth,  and  how? 


XV 


THE  PERSIAN  PERIOD,  INCLUDING  THE  CON- 
FLICT BETWEEN  THE  GREEKS  AND 
THE  PERSIANS 

THE   Medo-Persian   empire   established  by   Cyrus 
lasted   about  200  years — to  be  exact,  207  years. 
But  from  the  close  of  the  Old  Testament  Judah 
was  under  the  Persian  rule  about  100  years. 

The  first  great  event  of  the  Inter-Biblical  period  under 
Medo-Persian  rule  was  the  building  of  the  Samaritan 
temple  on  Mt.  Gerizim,  and  the  establishment  of  a  rival 
Jehovah- worship.  It  was  brought  about  in  this  wise: 
The  last  chapter  of  Nehemiah  says  this  (pretty  vigorous 
language,  too,)  :  "In  these  days  also  I  saw  that  the 
Jews  of  the  land  had  married  wives  of  Ashdod,  of  Am- 
mon,  and  of  Moab;  and  their  children  spake  half  in  the 
speech  of  Ashdod,  and  could  not  speak  in  the  Jews'  lan- 
guage, but  according  to  the  language  of  each  people. 
And  I  contended  with  them,  and  cursed  them,  and  smote 
certain  of  them,  and  plucked  off  their  hair,  and  made 
them  swear  by  God,  saying,  Ye  shall  not  give  your  daugh- 
ters unto  their  sons,  nor  take  their  daughters  for  your 
sons,  or  for  yourselves.  *  *  *  And  one  of  the  sons  of 
the  high  priest,  Eliashib,  was  son-in-law  to  Sanballat,  the 
Horonite:  therefore  I  chased  him  from  me." 

That  started  the  event  that  I  am  going  to  tell  about. 
It  ends  the  Old  Testament,  but  it  started  the  event.  The 
woman  that  Eliashib  had  married  was  very  beautiful,  as 
famous  in  her  day  as  Helen  of  Troy.    Eliashib  went  to 

186 


THE  PERSIAN  PERIOD  187 

his  father-in-law,  Sanballat,  and  said,  "I  must  give  up 
either  my  priesthood  or  my  wife,  but  I  do  not  want  to 
lose  either."  Sanballat  says,  "I  will  manage  it  for  you. 
I  will  build  you  a  temple  here  on  Mt.  Gerizim,  and  you 
shall  be  the  high  priest  of  that  temple."  And  he  car- 
ried out  his  promise.  That  temple  was  built.  They  wor- 
shipped Jehovah,  and  they  had  for  their  Bible  the  Penta- 
teuch only,  though  the  text  of  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch 
does  not  agree  literally  with  the  Hebrew  Pentateuch,  but 
nearly  so.  They  admit,  as  historical  value,  the  book  of 
Joshua.  Now,  there  was  a  Jehovah-religion,  with  its 
temple,  with  its  high  priest,  and  with  its  Bible,  within  a 
few  miles  of  Jerusalem.  About  b.  c.  107,  John  Hyr- 
canus,  one  of  the  descendants  of  the  Maccabees,  and  next 
to  Judas  Maccabeus  one  of  the  greatest  of  them,  not 
only  destroyed  that  temple,  but  also  destroyed  the  city 
of  Samaria,  as  he  says :  "So  that  a  visitor  could  not 
even  find  where  that  city  had  stood" — but  we  will  learn 
all  about  that  later.  I  am  just  telling  now  what  became 
of  that  rival  temple.  The  destruction  of  the  temple, 
however,  did  not  stop  the  feud.  It  existed  in  New  Testa- 
ment times.  In  John  4  we  find  our  Lord  talking  with  a 
woman  of  Samaria,  who  insists  that  the  worship  of 
God  ought  to  be  upon  Mt.  Gerizim.  In  the  life  of  our 
Lord  the  Samaritans  would  always  welcome  the  Jews 
passing  through  going  north,  but  would  not  give  any 
shelter  to  a  Jew  going  south  to  worship  at  the  temple. 
Because  Christ  was  refused  shelter  in  passing  south, 
that  son  of  thunder,  John,  wanted  to  call  down  fire  from 
heaven  on  them.  So  that  was  a  marvelous  event  as 
bearing  on  the  subsequent  history  of  the  Jews.  It  came 
about  in  connection,  as  many  things  do,  with  a  pretty 
woman. 
The  second  great  event  of  the  Inter-Biblical  period 


188         THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

under  Persian  rule  was  the  union  of  civil  and  religious 
powers  in  one  person  by  the  satrap  of  the  district,  mak- 
ing the  high  priest  to  be  also  the  governor.  The  duty  of 
the  governor  was  to  collect  the  tribute  coming  to  the 
Persian  empire.  In  order  to  simplify  matters,  the  satrap 
of  Syria  made  the  Jewish  high  priest  governor.  The 
evil  consequences,  the  far-reaching  consequences  of  that 
act  may  be  gathered,  first,  from  a  story  in  Josephus' 
"Antiquities,"  book  XI,  chapter  7.  He  shows  that  when 
Eliashib,  the  high  priest,  died  he  left  two  sons,  Johanan 
the  elder  and  Joshua  the  younger.  Both  of  these  wanted 
to  be  high  priest,  because  to  be  high  priest  was  also  to 
be  governor.  Johanan  was  the  one  entitled  to  it,  but  a 
very  influential  general  of  the  Persian  king,  Bagoses,  had 
promised  the  high  priesthood  to  the  younger  son  when- 
ever the  vacancy  occurred,  whereupon,  in  a  row  in  the 
temple  itself,  Joshua  the  younger  son,  was  killed.  The 
Persian  general  came  and  started  to  enter  the  temple, 
and  they  stopped  him.  He  said,  "Will  I  defile  your  tem- 
ple any  more  than  the  man  you  murdered  here  in  the 
temple?"  And  he  put  this  kind  of  a  tax  on  them:  Fifty 
shekels  for  every  lamb  that  was  offered  in  sacrifice.  Of 
course,  that  was  a  great  deal  more  than  the  price  of 
the  lamb — it  was  two  or  three  hundred  per  cent  more, 
and  as  they  offered  thousands  of  lambs  we  can  imagine 
only  what  that  tax  was.  It  was  a  window-tax  that  Vic- 
tor Hugo  went  wild  over,  France  taxing  light,  that  is, 
the  poor  people  could  not  have  windows  in  their  houses 
because,  for  every  window  in  the  house  they  had  to  pay 
so  much  more  tax.  So  to  tax  the  very  offerings  of  re- 
ligion was  a  tremendous  innovation.  Suppose  every 
time  we  gave  a  dollar  to  missions,  the  State  should  tax 
us  three  dollars.  That  would  dry  up  the  source  of  con- 
tribution pretty  soon,  wouldn't  it  ? 


THE  PERSIAN  PERIOD  189 

The  first  evil  was  in  uniting  the  civil  and  the  religious 
powers  in  one  person.  And  the  second  evil  was,  that 
whenever  we  begin  to  unite  church  and  state,  the  state 
may  say,  "I  have  the  right  to  tax  all  contributions  of  the 
church."  The  third  and  greatest  evil  that  arose  was  that 
the  state,  from  this  precedent,  began  to  claim  the  right 
to  appoint  the  high  priest,  claiming  that  the  leader  of  re- 
ligion must  be  appointed  by  the  state. 

The  next  great  evil  was  that  the  office  of  high  priest 
became  a  matter  of  barter  and  sale.  The  one  who  con- 
trolled the  revenues,  just  so  he  satisfied  the  central  gov- 
ernment, could  keep  just  as  much  as  he  pleased  in  his 
own  pocket.  For  instance,  if  the  Persian  governor  need- 
ed a  revenue,  say  $100,000  a  year,  and  this  high  priest 
were  to  tax  them  $300,000,  he  could  send  the  state  $100,- 
000  and  keep  $200,000.  Later  on  in  the  history  this 
fearful  precedent,  established  at  this  time,  had  evil 
eflfects  more  far-reaching.  In  Christ's  time,  there  were 
two  living  high  priests.  Whoever  was  governor  would 
claim  the  right  to  appoint  the  high  priest.  Caiaphas  and 
his  father-in-law,  Annas,  were  both  high  priests.  In  or- 
der to  illustrate  the  thought :  What  if  the  Tarrant  County 
judge  claimed  the  right  to  appoint  all  the  pastors  of  the 
churches  in  the  county?  What  if  the  governor  claimed 
the  right  to  appoint  our  superintendent  of  missions,  or 
the  president  of  our  convention? 

The  third  great  event  of  the  Inter-Biblical  period  was 
the  overthrow  of  the  Medo-Persian  empire  by  Alexan- 
der the  Great,  consummated  b.  c.  330.  The  several  pe- 
riods of  the  struggle  between  the  Greeks  and  the  Per- 
sians were  as  follows : 

Period  the  First:  Before  the  Greeks  were  united  into 
one  government  under  Philip  II,  king  of  Macedonia. 
This  period  extends  from  b.  c.  500  to  b.  c.  336.     The 


190  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

three  Persian  kings  most  concerned  were  Darius  I,  son 
of  Hystaspis;  Xerxes  the  Great,  who  married  Esther; 
and  Artaxerxes  Mnemon,  the  last  only  coming  within 
the  period.  Under  Darius  I,  as  I  briefly  discussed  in 
the  preceding  chapters,  came  the  defeat  of  the  Persians 
200,000  strong  by  the  Athenians  under  Miltiades,  20,000 
strong,  at  the  battle  of  Marathon,  right  under  the  walls 
of  Athens  on  the  plain  touching  the  sea. 

I  will  make  one  remark  about  that  famous  battle. 
When  I  was  four  years  old  I  slept  with  my  oldest  brother, 
who  was  a  grown  man.  He  commenced  my  instruction 
in  history  by  telling  me  of  the  great  events  of  history  at 
night.  I  had  to  keep  the  lights  up  and  the  fire  burning, 
and  he  was  to  teach  me  history.  We  got  started  one 
night  on  Greek  history,  and  concluded  to  finish  it  in  bed. 
When  he  described  the  battle  of  Marathon,  how  the 
20,000  Greeks  charged  the  200,000  Persians  and  put 
them  to  instant  flight,  followed  them  to  the  sea  where 
the  Persians  were  trying  to  get  on  their  ships,  wading 
into  the  water  in  pursuit,  grabbing  hold  of  the  little  ships 
until  their  hands  were  cut  off,  then  grabbing  them  with 
their  teeth  until  their  heads  were  cut  off — when  he  came 
to  that  point  I  jumped  up  in  bed  and  shouted  so  loud  I 
awoke  everybody  in  the  house :  "Hurrah  for  the  Greeks !" 
I  shall  never  forget  my  introduction  to  the  battle  of 
Marathon. 

Under  Xerxes  the  Great,  as  I  have  already  said,  were 
gathered  an  army  of  2,000,000  men  for  the  invasion  of 
Greece.  There  were  1,800,000  by  measurement,  not  by 
counting.  Ten  thousand  were  made  to  stand  in  the  small- 
est square  possible,  the  space  was  marked  off,  and  then, 
without  any  more  counting,  was  filled  180  times.  The 
great  battles  of  this  invasion  were,  first,  the  defense  of 
the  pass  at  Thermopylae  by  Leonidas  and  his  Spartans; 


THE  PERSIAN  PERIOD  191 

second,  the  decisive  defeat  of  the  Persians  in  the  great 
sea  fight  at  Salamis  by  the  Athenian  general,  Themis- 
tocles;  third,  the  decisive  defeat  of  the  Persian  land 
forces  at  Platea, 

The  battle  of  Marathon  made  such  an  impression  on  the 
young  men  of  Athens  that  when  a  man  said  to  Themis- 
tocles :  "Why  is  it  you  can  not  sleep?  You  are  restless 
all  night  long,"  he  said,  "The  honors  of  Miltiades  will  not 
let  me  sleep."  I  have  often  quoted  that  to  show  the 
inspiring  effect  of  a  great  action  on  the  mind  of  young 
men ;  how  an  achievement  by  one  will  suggest  and  stimu- 
late a  like  achievement  by  others.  The  Persian  fleet  was 
almost  entirely  destroyed. 

Now,  under  Artaxerxes  Mnemon  occurred  a  great  bat- 
tle east  of  the  Euphrates  River,  at  Cunaxa,  against  his 
brother  Cyrus — Cyrus  the  younger.  Cyrus  rebelled 
against  his  brother,  Artaxerxes  Mnemon.  He  wanted  to 
be  king  of  Persia,  and  having  found  out  how  the  Greeks 
could  fight,  he  hired  ii,ooo  Greeks  for  his  army.  In  this 
great  battle  east  of  the  Euphrates  River,  in  the  first 
charge,  Cyrus  was  killed  and  all  of  his  army  defeated 
except  the  ii,ooo  Greeks.  They  swept  away  everybody 
that  stood  in  front  of  them,  but  when  the  fight  was  over, 
there  stood  10,000  Greeks  with  half  a  million  men  around 
them,  but  they  would  not  surrender.  They  were  asked 
to  parley,  and  their  generals,  under  a  flag  of  truce,  went 
to  confer  with  the  Persians  and  the  Persians  killed  them. 
And  that  body  of  Greeks,  now  without  officers,  elected 
new  officers,  and  the  most  masterly  retreat  in  any  history 
is  the  retreat  of  that  body  of  10,000  Greeks.  We  find 
the  history  of  it  in  Xenophon's  Anabasis.  That  is  the 
first  Greek  book  I  had  to  read  in  studying  Greek.  That 
column  of  Greeks  on  their  march  from  the  Euphrates 
to  the  Black  Sea,  going  over  an  entirely  new  country, 


192  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

and  without  ever  breaking  ranks  or  being  whipped  in  a 
fight,  they  got  safely  back  home.  It  was  a  great  enter- 
prise. The  effect  of  that  battle  was  far  greater  than  all 
the  others  I  have  mentioned.  It  left  the  impression  on 
the  Greek  mind  that  the  Persians  were  very  vulnerable, 
and  that  the  Greeks  could  whip  them  under  any  fair  cir- 
cumstances, and  suggested  the  unity  of  the  Greek  states 
with  the  view  to  the  destruction  of  the  Persian  empire. 
Period  the  Second:  The  conquest  of  Alexander  the 
Great  from  b.  c.  336  to  b.  c.  323.  This  is  a  very  short 
time.  Philip  II,  king  of  Macedonia,  united  the  petty 
Greek  states  into  one  government  with  himself  as  the 
commander-in-chief,  and  made  preparations  to  invade 
Persia,  but  was  assassinated  by  an  enemy  in  b.  c.  336. 
His  19  year  old  boy,  Alexander,  succeeded  him,  and  he 
devoted  about  a  year  to  continuing  the  preparations  of 
his  father,  and  that  same  year  the  last  Persian  king  came 
to  the  throne,  Darius  III  Codomannus.  Here  is  a  world 
ruling  empire;  there  is  a  19-year-old  boy.  In  the  spring 
of  B,  c.  334,  Alexander  crossed  the  Hellespont.  Soon 
after  crossing  the  Hellespont  he  met  the  Persian  army  at 
the  river  Granicus.  Indeed,  he  had  to  ford  the  river  to 
get  to  them.  But  his  men,  when  he  plunged  into  the 
stream  himself,  forded  the  river  and  utterly  routed  the 
much  larger  Persian  army  on  the  other  side.  That  was 
the  spring  of  b.  c.  334.  He  devoted  a  little  over  a  year 
to  conquering  Asia  Minor,  and  as  he  moved  eastward  he 
safeguarded  the  seaports  on  the  Mediterranean.  In  b.  c. 
333,  that  is,  the  next  year  after  he  started,  he  met  the 
great  army  of  Darius  in  a  pass  in  the  mountains  between 
Cilicia  and  Syria,  at  Issus.  It  was  a  pass  between  the 
mountains ;  the  mountains  went  up  on  one  side  and  the 
sea  was  on  the  other.  Alexander,  with  an  equal  front, 
cared  nothing  how  many  deep  the  Persians  were  packed. 


THE  PERSIAN  PERIOD  193 

The  Persian  army  was  almost  annihilated,  and  the 
mother,  wife,  daughter,  and  camp  equipage  of  Darius 
were  captured. 

Instead  of  going  right  on  to  Babylon,  he  determined 
to  make  all  the  Mediterranean  coast  safe,  so  he  turned 
aside  to  conquer  the  city  of  Tyre,  and  all  the  coast  cities 
to  Gaza.  Then  he  turned  to  Jerusalem  and  received  the 
submission  of  that  city,  which  I  will  tell  more  about  di- 
rectly. Then  he  went  to  Egypt  and  conquered  it,  and  built 
a  city  after  his  own  name  at  the  mouth  of  the  Nile,  and 
called  it  Alexandria,  and  it  has  been  a  great  city  from 
that  date  to  this. 

Then,  to  give  the  next  date,  in  b.  c.  331  he  crossed  the 
Euphrates  River,  and  gave  the  final  blow  to  the  power 
of  the  Persians  in  the  great  battle  of  Arbela.  That  is 
a  little  east  of  where  ancient  Nineveh  stood,  and  in  that 
great  battle  the  Persian  power  was  ground  to  fine  dust. 
Darius  fled,  but  was  soon  assassinated.  Alexander  then 
turned  south,  and  in  330  b.  c.  he  made  his  triumphal 
entrance  into  Babylon.  But  that  did  not  satisfy  him. 
He  marched  out  still  into  the  far  east,  conquering  and 
exploring,  and  building  cities  in  Afghanistan  and  Bok- 
hara, crossed  the  great  river,  Indus,  and  conc|uered  the 
Punjab  section  of  India,  and  would  have  gone  on  to  the 
other  ocean  but  his  old  veterans  said  they  did  not  want 
to  go  any  further.  So  he  turned  around,  and  in  b.  c. 
324  he  re-entered  Babylon  to  make  it  the  capital  of  his 
empire — and  the  next  year  he  died  from  taking  too  big 
a  drink  of  ardent  spirits.  There  was  an  immense  cup 
called  Hercules,  and  because  somebody  said  that  no  man 
could  drink  all  that  was  in  that  vessel  at  one  time,  he, 
believing  himself  a  demi-god,  drank  it  all.  He  never 
recovered.  That  was  in  b.  c.  323.  When  he  died  he  was 
just  32  years  old,  and  no  man  known  to  history  had  such 


194  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

a  career — no  Caesar,  no  Hannibal,  no  Bonaparte — a  boy 
conquered  the  world  in  about  six  years,  including  much 
of  the  country  that  England  now  holds  in  India. 

I  have  given  a  brief  account  of  his  history,  and  now 
we  come  to  the  important  part  about  him — his  touch  with 
the  Jews  living  in  Jerusalem  during  the  Inter-Biblical 
period.  I  will  follow  the  account  here  given  by  Josephus. 
While  Alexander  was  besieging  Tyre  he  wrote  a  letter 
to  the  high  priest  and  governor  at  Jerusalem,  demanding 
that  he  send  auxiliary  troops  and  supplies.  Jaddua  re- 
plied, "I  have  taken  the  oath  of  allegiance  to  Darius.  I 
cannot  do  it."  Alexander  said  nothing,  but  kept  it  in  his 
mind.  The  Samaritans  sent  the  supplies.  As  soon  as  he 
had  conquered  Gaza  he  determined  to  look  in  on  that 
Jerusalem  that  would  refuse  him.  When  Jaddua  heard 
that  Alexander  was  approaching,  he  formed  a  great  pro- 
cession of  the  priesthood  and  himself  in  full  regalia,  ac- 
cording to  the  Aaronic  costume,  marching  at  the  head 
of  it  and  holding  the  sacred  scriptures,  without  a  sword 
or  spear,  coming  simply  with  the  word  of  God. 

The  conqueror  of  the  world  and  the  high  priest  met. 
Alexander's  generals  expected  him  to  order  them  all  to 
instant  execution.  Instead  he  leaped  down  from  his 
horse,  approached  and  saluted  the  high  priest  with  great 
respect,  walked  with  him  back  into  the  city,  and  paid  for 
the  sacrifices  to  be  offered  according  to  the  Jewish  law, 
and  then  turned  to  the  high  priest  and  said,  "Ask  me  what 
you  will." 

The  high  priest  said,  "Our  people  plant  no  crops  the 
seventh  year;  exempt  us  from  tribute  on  the  Sabbatic 
year." 

He  said,  "Granted." 

"Our  people  want  to  enjoy  our  own  religion  in  our  own 
way." 


THE  PERSIAN  PERIOD  195 

"Granted." 

"Our  brethren  of  the  dispersion  in  Babylon  and  Media, 
where  you  are  going,  want  to  enjoy  their  religion  in  their 
own  way." 

"Granted." 

"Can  we  enter  your  army  on  a  footing  of  equality?" 

"Granted,  and  I  will  transport  a  number  of  you  to 
Egypt  where  I  am  going,  and  when  I  build  a  city  there 
I  will  give  you  a  separate  section  of  the  city  to  be  known 
as  the  Jewish  quarter." 

Subsequent  histories  of  certain  cities  tell  us  of  the 
Jewish  quarter.  Tacitus,  Paul,  and  the  Roman  poets  tell 
us  about  it. 

"In  your  own  quarter  of  the  city  you  may  elect  your 
own  magistrates,  and  have  your  religion  as  you  wish  it." 

Parmenio,  the  leading  general  of  Alexander,  was  as- 
tounded, and  in  explanation  Alexander  said: 

"While  I  was  in  Macedon,  before  I  started  on  this 
expedition,  and  was  studying  in  my  mind  about  this  move- 
ment, one  night  I  slept,  and  in  my  dream  I  saw  this  very 
man  in  this  very  dress  he  is  wearing  now,  come  to  me 
and  say,  'Hesitate  not;  cross  the  Hellespont;  the  Per- 
sians will  fall  before  you.' " 

And  it  is  a  remarkable  fact  that  in  Babylon  and  in  every 
part  of  the  co,untry  that  he  swayed  he  gave  many  privi- 
leges to  the  Jews. 

Daniel  represents  the  transition  of  empire  from  Persian 
to  Grecian  as  follows:  In  Daniel  2:32  he  makes  the 
body  and  thighs  of  brass  of  that  luminous  image  seen  by 
Nebuchadnezzar  represent  Greece,  and  in  the  7th  chap- 
ter and  6th  verse,  the  vision  of  the  leopard  with  four 
wings,  he  makes  Greece.  And  in  8:5  (we  find  all  Gre- 
cian history  for  centuries  forecast  in  Daniel),  he  says, 
"And  as  I  was  considering,  behold  a  he-goat  came  from 


196         THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

the  West  over  the  face  of  the  whole  earth  and  touched 
not  the  ground :  and  the  goat  had  a  notable  horn  between 
his  eyes.  And  he  came  to  the  ram  that  had  the  two  horns, 
which  I  saw  standing  before  the  river,  and  ran  upon  him 
in  the  fury  of  his  power.  And  I  saw  him  come  close 
unto  the  ram,  and  he  was  moved  with  anger  against  him, 
and  break  his  two  horns ;  and  there  was  no  power  in  the 
ram  to  stand  before  him;  but  he  cast  him  down  to  the 
ground,  and  trampled  upon  him ;  and  there  was  none  that 
could  deliver  the  ram  out  of  his  hand." 

We  will  come  to  the  four  horns  later,  but  just  now  I 
give  the  account  that  relates  to  the  breaking  of  the  one 
horn,  the  notable  horn :  "And  the  he-goat  magnified  him- 
self exceedingly,  and  when  he  was  strong  the  great  horn 
was  broken,  and  instead  of  it  there  came  up  four  notable 
horns  toward  the  four  winds  of  heaven." 


QUESTIONS 

1.  How  long  lasted  the  Medo-Persian  empire  established  by 
Cyrus  ? 

2.  From  the  close  of  the  O.  T.  how  long  was  Judah  under 
the  Persian  rule? 

3.  What  the  first  great  event  of  the  Inter-Biblical  period  under 
Persian  rule,  and  how  was  it  brought  about? 

4.  When  and  by  whom  was  this  temple  destroyed,  and  did  the 
destruction  of  the  temple  end  the  feud? 

5.  What  and  when  the  second  great  event  in  the  Inter-Biblical 
period  under  Persian  rule,  how  was  it  brought  about,  what  its  far- 
reaching  developments,  and  what  its  evils? 

6.  What  the  third  great  event  of  the  Inter-Biblical  period,  and 
how  and  when  brought  about? 

7.  What  the  first  period  of  the  struggle  between  the  Greeks 
and  the  Persians,  and  who  the  Persian  kings  most  concerned? 

8.  What  the  author's  experience  in  learning  Greek  history? 

g.  What  the  relative  sizes  of  the  Grecian  and  Persian  armies 
in  this  struggle,  and  what  the  great  battles  of  the  invasion  of 
Xerxes? 

10.    Describe  the  battle  of  Cunaxa  and  the  results. 


THE  PERSIAN  PERIOD  197 

ri.     What    the    second    period    of    the    struggle    between    the 
Greeks  and  the  Persians? 

12.  Describe   the  various  conquests  of  Alexander  the  Great, 
and  his  death. 

13.  What  the  relation  between  Alexander  and  the  Jews,  how 
illustrated,  and  what  Alexander's  own  explanation  of  it? 

14.  How  does  Daniel  represent  the  transition  of  empires  from 
the  Persians  to  the  Grecians? 


XVI 

THE  JEWS  UNDER  GREEK  RULE,  FROM  THE 

DEATH  OF  ALEXANDER  THE  GREAT  TO 

THE  TIME  JUDEA  PASSED  FROM  THE 

RULE  OF  THE  PTOLEMIES  OF 

EGYPT  TO  THE  RULE  OF  THE 

SELEUCIDS  AT  ANTIOCH, 

B.C.  323  TO  198 

THIS  chapter  covers  a  period  of  125  years.  We 
have  briefly  considered  in  the  preceding  chapter, 
first,  the  struggle  between  the  petty  Greek  states 
and  the  Persians,  until  the  consolidation  of  the  Greek 
power  under  Philip  II,  king  of  Macedonia,  who  was 
assassinated  b.  c.  336 ;  and  second,  the  consummation  of 
that  struggle  at  the  battle  of  Arbela,  the  overthrow  of  the 
Persian  empire,  and  the  conquest  of  the  world  by  Alex- 
ander the  Great,  who  died  at  Babylon  b.  c.  323.  We 
found  Alexander  to  be  the  greatest  of  all  military  con- 
querors in  the  annals  of  time,  whose  greatness  was  largely 
attributable  to  one  teacher,  Aristotle,  who  had  charge  of 
his  education  from  13  to  16  years  of  age,  and  to  one  in- 
spiring book,  the  greatest  of  all  epics,  "Homer's  Iliad," 
which  he  carried  with  him  in  all  his  wars  and  explora- 
tions, putting  it  under  his  camp  pillow  every  night. 

What  a  lesson  that  is!  The  power  of  a  great  teacher 
and  the  power  of  a  great  book,  as  reproduced  in  a  stu- 
dent's life! 

Our  concern  with  this  marvelous  ancient  history  is  lim- 
ited to  a  single  inquiry:  How  did  the  Greek  conquest  of 
the  world  affect  the  kingdom  of  God?    We  have  consid- 

198 


JEWS  UNDER  GREEK  RULE  199 

ered  so  much  of  that  inquiry  as  related  to  Alexander  him- 
self and  the  Jews.  We  are  now  to  continue  the  inquiry 
on  the  relation  of  the  Jews  and  Alexander's  successors. 
Here  we  are  estopped  from  limiting  our  investigation  to 
the  comparatively  few  Jews  occupying  the  small  terri- 
tory around  Jerusalem,  for  that  territory  at  this  time, 
and  ever  since  their  return  from  exile,  was  very  small. 
Later  on  in  this  Inter-Biblical  period,  we  will  see  an 
expansion  of  territory  equal  to  David's  kingdom. 

The  first  thought  of  the  lesson  is  that  with  Alexander 
there  came  into  crystalized  use  a  new  term  that  will 
largely  affect  Jewish  history  for  hundreds  of  years.  In 
fact,  it  is  very  prominent  during  the  New  Testament 
period.  This  term  was  "Hellenism,"  or  "Hellenists," 
which  was  applied  to  the  Jews  of  the  dispersion,  in  con- 
trast with  the  Hebrews  living  in  the  Holy  Land.  The 
Hellenists  were  Grecianized  in  foreign  lands,  many  of 
them  so  Grecianized  that  they  could  not  even  speak,  either 
the  Hebrew  or  the  Aramaic  language.  The  modification 
was  not  one  of  language  only ;  the  Greek  cult  influenced 
them  in  many  ways.  We  find  in  Acts  6  and  many  places 
elsewhere,  that  it  was  a  problem  in  the  apostolic  church. 
Some  of  the  New  Testament  books  are  addressed  exclu- 
sively to  the  Hellenists :  James  wrote  to  the  twelve  tribes 
of  the  dispersion  in  Asia  Minor,  and  the  letter  to  the 
Hebrews  was  to  the  same  class.  All  the  other  letters  of 
Paul  concerned  the  Hellenists  more  than  the  Hebrews 
of  Judea.  The  Jew  of  the  dispersion  constituted  the 
overwhelming  majority  of  the  Jewish  race.  There  had 
been  many  forced  deportations  of  Jews  by  conquerers 
into  foreign  lands,  few  of  whom  ever  returned  to  live  in 
Palestine.  Many  colonies  of  Jews,  by  their  own  consent, 
were  planted  in  various  parts  of  the  world  by  the  rulers. 
Then  their  own  restless  migrations  for  the  purposes  of 


«00  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

trade  and  commerce  carried  them  everywhere.  They  all, 
however,  regarded  Jerusalem  as  their  Holy  City,  and  their 
restored  temple  as  their  center  of  unity.  They  paid  their 
temple  tax,  and  thousands  of  them  from  every  land  went 
up  to  the  great  annual  feasts. 

At  the  famous  Christian  Pentecost,  Acts  2,  they  were 
present  from  every  nation  under  heaven,  as  that  record 
says — Parthia,  Proconsular  Asia,  Phrygia,  Pamphylia, 
Egypt,  Cyrene,  Rome,  Crete  and  Arabia.  The  Greek 
influence,  mark  you,  was  not  limited  to  the  Jews  of  the 
dispersion.  The  small  Judea  about  Jerusalem  was  cir- 
cled by  Greek  cities,  multiplying  points  of  contact  with 
the  home  Jews.  In  Alexander's  time  these  environing 
Greek  cities  were  Gaza,  Joppa,  Ashkelon,  Ashdod,  Samaria, 
Hyppus ;  east  of  the  Jordan,  Scythopolis  and  Gadara  in 
Galilee ;  Alexandria  and  others  in  Egypt ;  and  under 
Ptolemy  Philadelphus,  Ptolemais  on  the  coast  was  added, 
and  the  famous  Kabbah  of  the  Ammonites  became  the 
Greek  Philadelphia. 

These  Greek  cities  kept  multiplying  in  the  passing  years, 
until  Jerusalem  was  ring-fired  by  them,  and  there  was 
no  resisting  the  Greek  cult.  So  powerful  was  it  that 
it  conquered  Rome  after  Rome  had  conquered  the  Gre- 
cian empire.  Generally,  under  the  Greek  rule,  as  it  had 
been  generally  under  the  Persian  rule,  the  Jews  enjoyed 
great  privileges,  both  at  home  and  abroad,  under  Alex- 
ander himself,  under  the  Ptolemies,  and  for  a  part  of  the 
time  under  the  Seleucids  at  Antioch.  Coele-Syria,  that 
is,  from  Lebanon  to  Egypt,  was  a  Greek  province,  of 
which  Judea  was  a  part.    We  now  come  to 

THE  DIVISION   OF  ALEXANDER'S  EMPIRE. 

For  many  years  after  Alexander's  death  there  were 
stormy  times  in  settling  the  succession.     The  various 


JEWS  UNDER  GREEK  RULE     201 

provinces  were  under  the  most  famous  of  the  Greek  gen- 
erals, who  battled  with  each  other  for  the  supremacy. 
When  all  of  Alexander's  children  died  the  issue  lay  be- 
tween Antigonus,  the  old  general,  on  one  side,  and  four 
other  generals  combined  on  the  other  side,  namely: 
Ptolemy,  Seleucus,  Lysimachus,  and  Cassander.  This 
issue  was  settled  in  the  great  battle  of  Ipsus,  in  Phrygia, 
B.  c.  301,  Antigonus  was  defeated  and  slain,  and  the 
four  conquering  generals  divided  the  empire  among  them- 
selves, that  is,  Lysimachus  and  Cassander  getting  the 
European  part  of  the  empire  and  the  Bosporus,  while 
Ptolemy  retained  Coele-Syria,  which  he  had  already  held 
ever  since  the  death  of  Alexander.  This  included  Judea. 
The  Ptolemies  held  Egypt  for  300  years,  succumbing  to 
the  Romans,  b.  c.  30.  Seleucus  got  for  his  part  all  of 
Asia  except  Coele-Syria,  and  built  for  his  capital  the 
famous  Antioch  at  the  mouth  of  the  Orontes.  There  the 
Seleucids  reigned  for  250  years,  until  they  were  broken 
up  by  the  Romans,  b.  c.  80.  This  was  the  partition 
expressed  in  one  verse  by  Daniel  (8:8),  where  he  says 
the  one  notable  horn  being  broken  off,  there  arose  four 
other  horns. 

Now,  because  Judea  lay  directly  between  Egypt  and 
Antioch,  occupying  the  most  strategical  position  be- 
tween Asia  and  Africa — if  not  the  most  strategical 
position  in  the  world — it  became  a  bone  of  contention 
between  the  Ptolemies  and  the  Seleucids,  and  thus  con- 
necting those  monarchies  with  the  kingdom  of  God.  The 
Ptolemies  held  Egypt  and  Coele-Syria,  as  I  have  already 
said,  before  the  original  partition,  and  held  it  until  b.  c. 
198.  They  had  already  been  holding  it  for  22  years 
before  the  partition,  and  that  partition  merely  confirmed 
the  position  of  the  Ptolemies.  The  Ptolemies  held  Coele- 
Syria  until  B.  c.  198,  which  I  will  tell  more  particularly 


202  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

about  a  little  later.  Then  Judea  passed  under  the  reign 
of  the  Seleucids  at  Antioch.  That  was  brought  about 
by  a  great  battle  near  the  head  of  the  Jordan  river, 
Paneas,  in  which  the  sixth  Seleucid,  Antiochus  III,  named 
the  Great,  overwhelmingly  defeated  the  general  of  the 
fifth  Ptolemy,  surnamed  Epiphanes,  and  attached  Coele- 
Syria  to  his  kingdom.  From  that  date  on  the  Seleucids 
held  Coele-Syria  and  Judea  until  it  was  freed  under  the 
Maccabees — the  most  heroic  part  of  the  Jewish  history, 
which  we  will  consider  later.    We  now  consider 

Judea  Under  the  Ptolemies. 

We  are  now  to  consider  Judea  under  the  Ptolemies, 
from  B.  c.  323  to  B.  c.  198.  The  plan  of  administra- 
tion was  partly  according  to  the  Greek  method,  and 
partly  accommodated  to  Jewish  home  rule.  The  high 
priest,  assisted  by  a  council,  which  afterwards  became 
the  Sanhedrin,  was  the  local  governor,  who  collected  all 
the  taxes  due  the  Ptolemies  and  remitted  them  to  Egypt. 
Ptolemy  Lagus,  surnamed  Soter,  or  Savior,  held  Judea 
and  Coele-Syria  when  Alexander  died,  b.  c.  323,  and  was 
confirmed  in  it  after  the  battle  of  Ipsus,  b.  c.  301,  as  he 
had  already  been  holding  it  over  20  years.  Five  Ptolemies 
have  to  do  with  this  section,  and  I  will  cite  only  one  great 
event  in  the  reign  of  each  one. 

I.  The  first  event  touching  the  Jews  was  an  act  of 
treachery  and  inhumanity  on  Ptolemy's  part,  which  called 
forth  the  most  sarcastic  remarks  from  Josephus  on  the 
misfit  of  his  name,  "Savior."  According  to  Josephus, 
he  came  to  Jerusalem  on  the  Sabbath  day  under  the  pre- 
tense of  offering  sacrifice  to  Jehovah,  and  was  received 
into  the  city.  There  installed,  he  disclosed  the  purpose 
of  his  expedition  to  be  a  slave  hunt  on  a  large  scale.    By 


JEWS  UNDER  GREEK  RULE  203 

unresisted  violence  there  and  elsewhere  in  Judea  and 
in  the  whole  of  the  province,  he  enslaved  many  thousands 
of  the  Jews,  and  transplanted  them  into  Egypt. 

Josephiis  quoted  a  reproach  from  a  Greek  historian 
that  so  great  a  city  should  allow  itself  to  be  captured, 
while  so  well  fortified,  on  account  of  a  silly  superstition  of 
non-resistance  on  the  Sabbath  day.  The  reproach  was 
better  justified  on  another  occasion  in  the  later  times 
of  the  Maccabees,  and  still  later  when  the  Romans  be- 
sieged Jerusalem.  This  injustice  perpetrated  by  Ptolemy 
Soter  occurred  before  the  battle  of  Ipsus,  while  the  war 
of  the  four  generals  against  Antigonus  was  going  on. 
After  the  partition  following  that  battle,  the  rule  of  this 
first  Ptolemy  was,  on  the  whole,  favorable  to  the  Jews, 
both  in  Egypt  and  Judea.  There  was  no  interference 
with  their  religion,  and  they  enjoyed  many  special  priv- 
ileges in  the  city  of  Alexandria.  The  first  Ptolemy 
reigned  40  years,  that  is,  from  the  death  of  Alexander, 
B.  c.  323. 

2.  The  second  great  event — and  I  count  it  one  of  the 
most  memorable  in  the  annals  of  time — (or  rather  a  series 
of  events)  occurred  in  the  reign  of  his  successor,  Ptolemy 
Philadelphus.  The  story  as  given  by  Josephus  is  some- 
what too  marvelous,  though  he  publishes  the  original 
documents  of  correspondence  passing  between  Ptolemy 
and  the  high  priest  at  Jerusalem.  This  great  event  was 
the  translation  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  into  Greek — 
that  famous  version  known  to  all  subsequent  ages  as  the 
Septuagint.  This  was  an  event  of  world-wide  impor- 
tance. Greek  had  become  the  vernacular  of  the  world. 
No  other  language  has  ever  equaled  it  in  expressing 
delicate  shades  of  thought.  The  world  had  now  the 
Hebrew  Bible,  the  Greek  Bible,  and  the  Samaritan  Bible. 
In   later  times   there  were   other  Greek   versions,  but 


204  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

the  Septuagint  has  easily  held  first  place  among  the  ver- 
sions in  subsequent  ages.  Christ  and  the  apostles  quoted 
the  Greek  text  oftener  than  the  Hebrew.  The  name  is 
derived  from  the  number  of  the  translators,  seventy  (or 
strictly,  72).  This  version  is  an  expression  of  the  rela- 
tion between  Hellenism  and  Hebraism. 

The  history  of  the  version  is  on  this  wise:  The  Greeks 
the  world  over  were  noted  for  literature,  arts,  philosophy, 
rhetoric,  oratory,  and  architecture.  And  this  Ptolemy 
Philadelphus  had  gathered  at  Alexandria  the  world's 
greatest  library  and  museum.  Alexandria  became  the 
world's  greatest  city  of  learning.  It  was  proposed  to 
place  in  this  famous  library  the  Greek  version  of  the 
Hebrew  sacred  books.  But  as  the  Jews  jealously  guarded 
the  manuscripts  of  their  sacred  Scriptures,  an  expedient 
to  gain  their  confidence  was  suggested,  to  wit :  That 
Ptolemy,  out  of  his  own  revenues,  redeem  from  bondage, 
not  only  the  great  multitude  of  Jews  enslaved  by  his 
father,  Ptolemy  Soter,  but  all  Jewish  slaves  in  Egypt, 
whether  brought  into  bondage  before  or  since  that  time, 
including  their  children,  to  the  number  of  more  than 
100,000.  He  paid  cash  to  the  owners  of  the  slaves  and 
redeemed  all  of  them.  What  a  contrast  with  the  Pharoah 
ruling  Egypt  in  Moses'  time ! 

Second,  that  he  donate  many  precious  utensils  and 
priceless  jewels  for  the  temple  furniture.  Third,  that 
he  make  a  large  cash  contribution  for  the  purchase  of 
sacrifices  at  Jerusalem.  Fourth,  that  he  send  an  honor- 
able embassy  announcing  his  generosities,  and  carrying 
a  written  petition  from  the  king  addressed  to  the  high 
priest,  and  all  the  translators  to  be  his  honored  guests 
in  Alexandria  while  they  were  translating,  and  then  to 
be  dismissed  with  great  honors  and  precious  gifts  to 
each  of  the  scholars. 


JEWS  UNDER  GREEK  RULE     206 

It  is  evident  from  the  records  that  only  a  version  of 
the  Pentateuch  was  originally  contemplated,  but  once 
undertaken  it  finally  included  all  the  sacred  books,  and 
other  Jewish  literature  besides.  The  translation  began 
B.  c.  250,  and  all  the  Pentateuch  was  translated  in  a  few 
days,  but  it  was  not  completed  in  all  its  parts  until  75  or 
100  years  later.  The  latter  part  is  very  much  inferior 
to  the  first  work  done,  and  it,  moreover,  included  Jewish 
literature  never  considered  by  the  Jews  as  a  part  of  their 
sacred  books.  The  Ptolemies  were  after  books  for  their 
library,  whether  profane  or  sacred.  Josephus  makes  a 
very  clear  distinction  between  the  sacred  Jewish  books 
and  other  Jewish  literature. 

If  only  half  the  details  given  by  Josephus  be  true — if 
we  allow  much  for  exaggeration — there  is  nothing  in 
human  history  to  compare  with  it.  The  story  of  Jerome's 
Vulgate,  and  King  James'  version  are  tame  beside  it. 
Ptolemy  Philadelphus  stands  immortalized  as  a  manu- 
mitter  of  slaves,  and  as  a  promoter  of  learning,  and  is 
entitled  to  more  enduring  fame  than  any  Greek  what- 
soever. 

But  this  great  enterprise  did  not  work  altogether  for 
good,  because  it  was  through  the  Septuagint,  followed  by 
the  Vulgate,  that  Romanists  got  their  aprocryphal  addi- 
tions to  the  Old  Testament,  of  which  I  gave  an  account 
in  a  preceding  chapter,  and  it  was  from  the  Septuagint 
that  the  Greek  Catholic  church  got  the  same  apocryphal 
additions.  The  Reformation  restored  the  sanctity  of 
the  Hebrew  Scriptures  as  the  Jews  themselves  held  it. 
Yet  to  the  Greeks  are  we  indebted  for  that  beginning 
of  translation  which  today  gives  to  every  nation  our  Bible 
in  its  own  tongue.  The  story  of  the  versions  is  one  of 
the  most  thrilling  in  the  annals  of  time. 

One  of  the  most  pleasing  parts  of  the  story  of  Jose- 


206  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

phus  is  the  account  of  the  impression  made  on  the  mind 
of  the  great  king  by  his  reading  of  the  Pentateuch  in 
Greek.  He  was  profoundly  stirred  by  the  sublime  and 
divine  majesty  of  that  holy  law.  How  incomparably 
superior  to  his  Homer,  Xenophon,  Herodotus,  Thucy- 
dides,  Demosthenes,  Socrates,  Plato,  Zeno,  Aristotle,  and 
Epicurus.  So  ever  to  great  and  dispassionate  minds  do 
God's  holy  words  appear.  If  Socrates,  without  gospel 
light,  was  a  seeker  after  God,  according  to  Acts  17:26, 
Q.y,  surely  Ptolemy  Philadelphus,  who  walked  in  the  light 
when  he  saw  it,  was  nigh  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  we 
may  at  least  indulge  the  hope  that  through  God's  grace 
in  Christ,  both  of  these  illustrious  heathen  may  appear 
in  the  heavenly  kingdom. 

3.  The  third  great  event,  or  series  of  events,  of  Jew- 
ish history  under  the  rule  of  Egypt  occurred  in  the  reign 
of  the  third  Ptolemy,  surnamed  Euergetes,  b.  c.  247  to 
222.  The  Jewish  high  priest,  Onias  II,  as  Josephus  says, 
was  a  man  of  "very  little  soul,"  obstinate  as  a  mule,  and 
a  contemptible  miser  who  flatly  refused  to  send  any  trib- 
ute to  Ptolemy.  In  vain  Ptolemy  threatened ;  in  vain 
the  people  protested  that  they  would  lose  their  nation 
and  their  holy  city.  This  bull-headed  priest  said,  "I  don't 
care;  let  it  bring  ruin."  He  was  not  going  to  pay  out 
any  money  to  Ptolemy — and  it  was  not  his  money,  either. 
This  brought  on  a  crisis  in  Jewish  afifairs.  His  nephew, 
Joseph,  a  son  of  Tobias,  was  allowed  to  save  the  situation 
by  an  expedient  that  was  a  bad  precedent,  and  entailed 
many  disasters.  This  young  Joseph  went  to  Egypt, 
gained  the  favor  of  the  king,  and  modestly  had  himself 
appointed  assessor  and  collector  of  the  king's  revenue  in 
the  whole  province  of  Coele-Syria,  which  included  Judea, 
at  a  high  fixed  rental.  Backed  by  an  adequate  corps  of 
Egyptian  troops  he  returned,  and  by  violent  and  oppres- 


JEWS  UNDER  GREEK  RULE  207 

sive  methods  farmed  the  revenue  for  22  years.  He  would 
go  to  a  place  and  select  the  names  of  the  wealthiest  citi- 
zens and  confiscate  their  property  until  he  got  revenue 
from  that  place.  In  this  way  he  combined  in  himself  ab- 
solute power,  both  civil  and  ecclesiastical.  Ptolemy  got 
his  revenue  all  right  from  these  abundant  confiscations, 
and  Joseph  in  the  meantime  feathered  well  his  own  nest. 

4.  The  fourth  notable  event  under  the  Ptolemies  was 
the  alienation  of  the  Jews  from  the  Egyptian  rule.  There 
had  been  a  smoldering  fire  against  Egypt  on  account  of 
the  methods  of  Joseph,  the  son  of  Tobias,  in  collecting 
revenue.  Such  methods  will  always  bring  revolt,  if  not 
revolution,  and  this  prepared  the  way  in  the  hearts  of 
many  Jews  for  swapping  masters.  An  opportunity  was 
presented  in  the  bitter  war  being  waged  between  the  6th 
Seleucid,  Antiochus  III,  surnamed  the  Great,  who  reigned 
B.  c.  223  to  187,  and  the  Ptolemies.  In  the  great  battle 
between  them,  fought  at  Raphia,  near  Gaza,  b.  c.  217, 
Antiochus  was  defeated.  Ptolemy,  resenting  the  favors 
shown  by  some  of  the  Jews  to  Antiochus,  now  thor- 
oughly alienated  the  whole  Jewish  nation  by  two  acts: 

First,  he  went  up  to  Jerusalem  and  outraged  their 
religious  feelings  by  thrusting  himself  into  the  Most  Holy 
place  of  the  temple,  from  which  he  fled,  as  Josephus 
says,  in  superstitioub  terror  as  if  he  had  seen  some  awful 
apparition. 

Second,  on  his  return  to  Egypt  he  aggravated  the  gen- 
eral Jewish  resentment  by  cruelty  and  oppression  of  the 
Jews  there — quite  an  unusual  thing  for  a  Ptolemy  to  do. 
That  is,  all  the  ground  gained  in  the  Jewish  favor  under 
Ptolemy  Philadelphus  was  now  lost. 

5.  The  fifth  and  last  series  of  events  of  the  period  of 
this  section  was  the  damage  done  the  Jews  by  Scopas, 
the  general  of  the  fifth  Ptolemy,  surnamed  Epiphanes. 


208  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

With  fire  and  sword  and  confiscation  he  swept  the  land. 
But  in  the  decisive  battle  of  Paneas,  near  the  head  of 
the  Jordan,  b.  c.  198,  Antiochus  overwhelmingly  defeated 
Scopas,  and  marched  to  Jerusalem,  which  received  him 
with  open  arms.  And  so  Judea  was  lost  to  Egypt  and 
passed  under  the  rule  of  the  Seleucids  at  Antioch. 


QUESTIONS 

1.  What  teacher  and  what  book  most  shaped  the  character  of 
Alexander  the  Great? 

2.  What  concern  have  we  with  all  this  ancient  Greek  history? 

3.  What  the  extent  of  Judea  at  this  time? 

4.  Where  the  overwhelming  majority  of  the  Jews? 

5.  What  new  term  came  in  with  Alexander,  and  what  the 
explanation  of  it? 

6.  Give  some  New  Testament  traces  of  it. 

7.  What  cause  had  brought  about  the  dispersion? 

8.  What  their  relation  to  Jerusalem? 

9.  Explain  how  Judea  itself  was  somewhat  Hellenized. 
ID.     What  the  extent  of  the  province  of  Coele-Syria? 

11.  Under  what  Greek  general  was  it  when  Alexander  died, 
and  how  long  did  his  successors  hold  it? 

12.  Tell  about  the  division  of  Alexander's  empire,  the  battle 
that  decided  it,  and  when  and  where  fought. 

13.  How  does  Daniel  in  one  verse  foretell  this  partition? 

14.  Name  the  four  Greek  generals  and  the  part  of  the  empire 
each  received. 

15.  With  which  two  only  are  we  concerned,  and  why? 

16.  How  long  did  the  Ptolemies  hold  Egypt,  and  to  whom  did 
its  control  pass? 

17.  How  long  did  the  Seleucids  hold  Antioch,  and  to  whom 
did  its  control  pass? 

18.  What  the  name  of  the  first  Ptolemy,  and  how  long  did  he 
reign? 

19.  What  great  event  of  his  reign  touched  Judea,  and  was  it 
before  or  after  the  battle  of  Tpsus? 

20.  What  unjust  reproach  was  cast  upon  the  Jews  and 
Jerusalem  by  a  Greek  historian  concerning  this  event? 

21.  What  the  second  great  event  under  the  Ptolemies,  and 
what  the  remarkable  story  as  told  by  Josephus? 

22.  When  did  this  work  of  translation  commence,  to  what 
extent  was  it  originally  limited,  and  how  enlarged,  and  when 
completed? 

23.  What  the  effect  on  Ptolemy's  mind  in  reading  the  Penta- 
teuch in  Greek? 


JEWS  UNDER  GREEK  RULE  209 

24.  What  place  in  history  do  these  events  give  Ptolemy? 

25.  What  the  importance  of  this  version? 

26.  Why  were  apocryphal  books  included? 

27.  What  the  subsequent  evil  of  this  inclusion? 

28.  What  third  great  event  under  the  Ptolemies,  and  what  its 
evil  consequences? 

29.  What  notable  event  under  the  4th  Ptolemy,  and  how 
brought  about? 

30.  What  the  events  under  the  5th  Ptolemy,  and  where  and 
when  was  the  decisive  battle  fought  which  transferred  Judea  to 
the  rule  of  the  Seleucids? 

Library  Questions 

1.  Tell  the  story  of  the  fate  of  the  great  library  at  Alexandria. 

2.  Cite  some  corrupt  doctrines  taught  in  the  apocryphal  books, 
and  yet  fostered  by  Romanists? 

3.  How  does  Josephus  distinguish  between  the  sacred  books 
and  other  Jewish  literature?    Quote  the  passage. 

4.  How  does  Josephus  make  out  the  22  sacred  books  so  as  to 
include  the  whole  Old  Testament,  and  how  do  other  Jews  make 
them  24? 

5.  What  other  translations  of  the  Old  Testament  into  Greek 
besides  the  Septuagint? 

6.  Origen  had  in  parallel  column  six  texts  called  the  Hexapla: 
What  were  the  six  texts? 


XVII 

THE    JEWS     UNDER    ANTIOCHUS     III,     SUR- 

NAMED    THE    GREAT,    AND    HIS    SON 

SELEUCUS  IV,  SURNAMED 

PHILOPATER 

THIS  period  is  only  23  years,  that  is,  from  the  bat- 
tle of  Paneas,  b.  c.  198,  to  the  beginning  of  the 
reign  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  b.  c.  175.  In  the 
preceding  chapter  we  considered  the  Jews  under  the 
Ptolemies  of  Egypt,  a  period  of  125  years,  b.  c.  323  to 
B.  C.  198.  We  limited  our  discussion  to  one  notable  event 
only  touching  the  Jews  under  each  of  the  five  Ptolemies. 
First,  the  treacherous  enslavement  of  many  of  the  Jews 
by  Ptolemy  I,  surnamed  Soter.  Second,  the  translation 
of  the  scriptures  into  Greek,  with  the  attendant  generosi- 
ties, under  Ptolemy  II,  surnamed  Philadelphus.  Third, 
the  stupidity  and  greed  of  the  high  priest,  Onias  II,  re- 
sulting in  the  farming  of  the  revenue  of  Coele-Syria  com- 
mitted to  Joseph,  son  of  Tobias,  under  Ptolemy  HI,  sur- 
named Euergetes.  Fourth,  the  alienation  of  the  Jews 
from  Egyptian  rule,  caused  by  Ptolemy  IV,  surnamed 
Philopater,  after  his  victory  at  Raphia  over  Antiochus 
III  of  Antioch,  surnamed  the  Great.  Fifth  (and  in  my 
discussion  before  I  did  not  sufficiently  touch  this),  the 
great  damage  to  the  Jews  done  by  Scopas,  the  general 
of  Ptolemy  V,  surnamed  Epii)hanes,  terminating  with  the 
defeat  of  Scopas  at  the  battle  of  Paneas. 

We  are  now  to  consider  the  fortunes  of  the  Jews  under 
Antiochus  the  Great,  and  his  son  Seleucus  IV.     Through- 

210 


ANTIOCHUS  III  AND   SELEUCUS  IV    211 

out  the  wars  of  the  Ptolemies  with  the  Seleucids  for  the 
province  of  Coele-Syria,  including  Judea,  the  Jews  were 
ground  to  powder  as  between  the  upper  and  nether  mill- 
stones. In  such  a  brief  discussion  of  this  period  our 
trouble  has  been  to  condense  from  such  vast  historical 
material,  which  enlarges  as  we  go  on.  We  have  been 
compelled  to  touch  lightly  the  Greek  historians,  and  from 
this  point  are  embarrassed  with  the  riches  of  material  in 
the  contemporaneous  Roman  historians — Livy,  Tacitus 
and  others,  to  say  nothing  of  great  modern  histories — 
Rollin,  Rawlinson  and  Brace,  and  Mommsen's  great 
"History  of  Rome,"  probably  one  of  the  greatest  con- 
tributions to  history  of  modern  times.  The  matter  has 
been  complicated  by  treaties  between  the  two  powers, 
based  on  intermarriages.  The  most  notable  of  these,  so 
far,  was  the  marriage  of  Antiochus  II  to  Bernice,  the 
daughter  of  Ptolemy  Philadelphus,  and  later  to  be  fol- 
lowed by  a  marriage  between  Cleopatra,  daughter  of 
Antiochus  the  Great,  and  Ptolemy  V,  surnamed  Epiph- 
anes.  These  political  marriages  make  a  great  deal  of 
trouble  in  history. 

As  I  have  said  before,  the  prophecies  of  Daniel  consti- 
tute the  clearest  historical  guide  to  this  period.  If  we 
want  to  understand  the  war  between  the  Seleucids  and 
the  Ptolemies,  we  will  find  it  in  the  interpretation  of  the 
nth  chapter  of  Daniel,  connecting  Daniel  8:9-26  with 
II :  2-20,  as  both  of  these  refer  to  Antiochus  Epiphanes. 
A  commentary  on  Daniel  from  the  Cambridge  Bible,  by 
Driver,  a  pronounced  radical  critic,  has  as  much  poison 
in  much  of  the  book  as  there  is  meat  in  an  egg.  But  his 
exposition  of  Daniel  11  and  that  section  of  the  8th  chap- 
ter that  touches  this  period  is  very  fine,  very  scholarly, 
and  very  clear.  Josephus  is  hard  to  follow  because  he 
makes  such  a  mix-up  of  his  historical  matter,  particularly 


21«  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

in  his  dates.  Sometimes  he  gives  a  date  a  hundred  years 
wrong,  except  where  he  follows  the  Maccabees.  When 
he  sticks  to  I  Maccabees  he  is  generally  right. 

The  Jews  Under  the  Seleucids. 

We  now  consider  the  fortunes  of  the  Jews  under 
Antiochus  the  Great.  After  the  battle  of  Paneas  and  his 
welcome  into  Jerusalem,  after  his  annexation  of  the 
province  of  Coele-Syria,  he  was  as  generous  to  the  Jews 
as  Ptolemy  Philadelphus.  When  he  got  to  Jerusalem 
and  received  the  joyful  welcome  in  that  city,  after  he 
had  defeated  and  captured  the  generals  of  the  Ptolemies, 
he  was  so  impressed  with  their  devotion  to  him  and  the 
valuable  service  they  had  rendered,  that  he  gave  a  sig- 
nal proof  of  his  gratitude.  I  do  not  know  just  where  we 
may  find  a  more  signal  testimony  of  gratitude,  manifested 
in  the  letters  he  wrote  to  the  generals  of  his  empire  every- 
where with  reference  to  the  Jews. 

First,  he  set  apart  a  large  pension  for  temple  sacrifice. 
He  used  his  treasury  to  furnish  them  food  and  supplies 
for  a  year,  and  seeds  for  planting.  Now,  to  me  that  is 
a  very  pleasant  bit  of  history  to  read.  True,  a  selfish 
motive  prompted  him.  He  wanted  these  faithful  Jews  as 
a  buffer  between  him  and  dangerous  enemies.  But  even 
then  this  heathen  did  it  more  gracefully  than  the  pre- 
scriptive Episcopalians  of  Virginia  reluctantly  endured 
the  settlement  of  the  Scotch-Irish  Presbyterians  in  the 
Shenandoah  valley  as  a  buffer  against  the  hostile  Indian 
tribes. 

I  had  not  space  in  the  preceding  chapter  to  tell  of  the 
movements  of  Antiochus  after  his  defeat  at  Raphia.  He 
had  turned  his  mind  to  the  East,  waging  successful  war- 
fare and  enriching  himself  with  spoils  until  he  had  re- 


ANTIOCHUS   III  AND   SELEUCUS  IV    213 

established  the  eastern  boundaries  of  Alexander's  old 
empire.  Hence,  with  largely  increased  resources  he  re- 
turned to  defeat  the  Ptolemies  at  Paneas  and  to  annex 
Coele-Syria.  Now  his  thought  is  toward  the  West.  He 
wants  to  break  or  block  the  rising  Roman  empire,  and 
aspires  to  restore  the  western  boundary  of  Alexander's 
empire,  which  had  been  pushed  east  by  the  Romans.  He 
intends  also  to  absorb  Egypt,  but  just  now  wants  peace 
with  the  Ptolemies,  that  he  may  concentrate  against 
Rome. 

To  this  end  he  makes  alliance  with  Philip  of  Macedon 
and  gives  his  daughter  in  marriage  to  Ptolemy,  having 
two  ends  in  view  by  this  marriage — to  secure  peace  be- 
hind him  while  he  wars  with  Rome,  and  through  his 
daughter  to  gain  a  quasi  title  to  Egypt  when  opportunity 
serves  to  enforce  it.  Daniel  foretells  that  marriage  in 
these  words :  "And  he  shall  set  his  face  to  come  with  the 
strength  of  his  whole  kingdom,  and  with  him  equitable 
conditions :  and  he  shall  perform  them :  and  he  shall  give 
them  the  daughter  of  women,  to  corrupt  her  (i.  e.,  Egypt), 
but  she  shall  not  stand,  neither  be  for  him.  After  this 
shall  he  turn  his  face  into  the  isles,  and  shall  take  many : 
but  a  prince  shall  cause  the  reproach  offered  by  him  to 
cease ;  yea,  moreover,  he  shall  cause  his  reproach  to  turn 
upon  him." 

In  the  phrase  of  Daniel  "to  corrupt  her,"  the  pronoun 
"her"  does  not  refer  to  his  daughter,  but  to  Egypt.  The 
thought  is  to  use  his  daughter  to  give  him  a  hold  on 
Egypt.  But  as  Daniel  foreshows,  the  marriage,  while  it 
brought  temporary  peace  to  the  Jews,  did  not  serve  the 
purpose  of  Antiochus.  Like  a  true  wife,  Cleopatra  stood 
by  her  husband,  and  she  bears  a  glorious  name  in  Egyp- 
tian history.  She  determined  that  if  she  was  to  be  mar- 
ried off-hand  that  way,  to  suit  the  political  need  of  her 


«14  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

father,  she  would  make  a  true  marriage  of  it.  And  she 
lived  and  died  in  Egypt,  beloved  by  all  the  people.  It  is 
refreshing  to  come  to  the  history  of  a  woman  of  high 
mind  and  a  high  standard  of  morals.  That  marriage,  he 
thought,  would  enable  him  to  get  possession  of  Egypt, 
and  then,  as  he  was  going  west,  to  get  all  the  rest  of  the 
old  empire,  but  he  made  a  mistake.  That  marriage  did 
not  help  him  with  the  Romans,  but  it  did  help  Ptolemy. 
As  Daniel  says :  "Then  shall  he  turn  his  face  to  the  isles, 
and  shall  take  many."  The  islands  here  mean  the  islands 
of  the  Mediterranean  Sea,  along  the  coast  of  Asia  Minor 
and  Greece,  following  the  track  of  all  the  conquerors. 
He  did  strike  out  west  with  a  great  army  and  captured 
all  of  Asia  Minor.  He  then  crossed  the  Hellespont,  over 
into  Macedonia.  Three  times  he  touches  the  Romans. 
The  last  crushes  him. 

At  Lysimalacia  the  Roman  legaticxn  met  him  in  warn- 
ing. He  gruffly  replied,  putting  a  reproach  on  them: 
"You  have  no  more  right  to  inquire  into  what  I  do  in 
Asia  than  I  have  to  inquire  what  you  do  in  Italy."  The 
Romans  never  forgot  a  thing  of  that  kind.  Antiochus 
pursued  his  march,  following  the  tracks  of  Xerxes  the 
Great  toward  lower  Greece.  But  in  the  pass  of  Ther- 
mopylae he  had  a  battle  with  the  Romans,  and  they 
whipped  him.  That  is  his  second  touch  with  them.  He 
then  fled  back  to  Ephesus  in  proconsular  Asia.  The  Ro- 
mans, after  the  Punic  wars,  that  is,  after  they  had  cap- 
tured Carthage,  were  looking  East,  and  they  had  already 
annexed  the  European  part  of  Alexander's  empire,  and 
when  Antiochus  came  into  Greece  interfering  with  their 
eastward  trend,  they  determined  to  carry  the  war  into 
his  own  country.  He  had  entered  into  an  alliance  with 
Philip  V,  king  of  Macedonia,  to  fight  the  Romans.  The 
Romans  easily  disposed  of  Philip,  and  crossed  the  Hel- 


ANTIOCHUS  in  AND   SELEUCUS  IV    216 

lespont,  going  after  Antiochus.  The  third  contact  was 
when  the  two  armies  came  together  in  Phrygia  at  Mag- 
nesia. The  book  of  Maccabees  gives  a  very  exaggerated 
account  of  the  numbers  engaged  and  of  the  war-elephants 
employed,  i.  e.,  if  we  may  trust  the  more  moderate  esti- 
mates of  the  Greek  historian,  Polybius.  In  this  battle, 
B.  c.  190,  the  Romans  entirely  broke  the  power  of  Anti- 
ochus the  Great,  exacting  the  following  humiliating  con- 
ditions of  peace : 

(i)  The  cession  of  all  Asia  Minor  west  of  the  Tau- 
rus Mountains. 

(2)  The  surrender  of  his  floats  and  war-elephants. 

(3)  A  crushing  war  indemnity  that  emptied  his  treas- 
ury and  whose  annual  payments  kept  it  empty.  This  vast 
war  indemnity  was  more  crushing  than  that  which  Ger- 
many exacted  of  France  after  the  war  of  1870.  This 
empty  treasury  brought  on  all  the  woes  of  succeeding 
Seleucids  until  the  dynasty  perished. 

(4)  They  required  him  to  give  up  his  children  and 
other  kindred  as  hostages.  It  became  a  proverb :  "Anti- 
ochus the  Great  was  a  king."  Or,  as  Virgil  describes 
Troy :  'Tllium  fuit."  Mommsen  comments :  "Never,  per- 
haps, did  a  great  power  fall  so  rapidly,  so  thoroughly,  so 
ignominiously,  as  the  kingdom  of  the  Seleucidae  under 
this  Antiochus  the  Great." 

Daniel's  prophecy  concludes  the  story :  "Then  he  shall 
turn  his  face  toward  the  fortresses  of  his  own  land ;  but 
he  shall  stumble  and  fall,  and  shall  not  be  found" — ful- 
filled when  he  was  attacked  and  slain  by  the  inhabitants 
of  Elymais  whose  temple  of  Bel  he  sought  to  rob  of  its 
treasures  to  meet  the  war  indemnity  exacted  by  Rome. 
"He  was  not  found,"  disappearing  as  completely  as  Enoch 
and  Elijah,  but  it  was  not  a  translation  upwards.  Kings 
have  to  have  money,  especially  when  they  keep  up  armies, 


ai6  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

and  it  occurred  to  him  that  the  best  way  to  get  the  money 
was  to  rob  the  temples. 

In  Mark  Twain's  "Innocents  Abroad"  is  one  of  his 
quaint  sayings :  "When  I  passed  over  Italy  and  saw  the 
poverty  and  squalor  of  the  people,  without  clothes,  with- 
out food  and  without  money,  and  when  I  saw  the  wealth 
of  the  ages  in  the  churches  and  in  the  cathedrals,  it  was 
a  wonder  to  me  that  they  never  thought  to  rob  the 
churches."  While  the  Italians  never  thought  of  it,  yet 
Antiochus  the  Great  thought  of  it. 

There  was  a  very  rich  temple  over  in  the  East,  at  Ely- 
mais.  The  temples  were  the  banks  of  the  country.  They 
were  the  sanctuaries — the  one  place  one  could  keep 
money  free  from  the  robber.  The  temple  of  Diana  at 
Ephesus  had  all  the  wealth  of  the  East  stored  in  it.  Now, 
this  temple  was  full  of  riches,  and  when  the  priest  who 
had  charge  of  the  temple  (a  heathen  priest)  heard  of 
the  purpose  for  which  Antiochus  was  coming,  he  let 
him  and  a  few  of  his  men  enter  the  temple,  then  shut  and 
barred  the  door,  and  killed  them  with  rocks — all  of  them. 

Well  might  Daniel  say :  "But  he  shall  stumble  and  fall, 
and  shall  not  be  found."  He  left  two  sons,  Seleucus, 
the  rightful  heir,  and  Antiochus  IV,  called  Epiphanes. 
Seleucus  succeeded  his  father.  Daniel  describes  him: 
"Then  shall  stand  up  in  his  place  one  that  shall  cause 
an  exactor  to  pass  through  the  glory  of  the  kingdom ; 
but  within  few  days  he  shall  be  destroyed,  neither  in 
anger  nor  in  battle."  That  is  his  history;  12  years  he 
reigned.  And  in  order  to  meet  these  annual  payments 
to  Rome  he  had  to  become  a  tax  collector.  He  sent  into 
Coele-Syria  after  taxes,  and  after  gleaning  all  he  could 
he  still  needed  much  money.  In  the  meantime  Judea  was 
prosperous  from  the  account  of  it  in  II  Maccabees: 
"Now  when  the  Holy  City  was  inhabited  with  all  peace, 


ANTIOCHUS   III  AND   SELEUCUS   IV    21T 

and  the  laws  were  kept  very  well,  because  of  the  godli- 
ness of  Onias,  the  high-priest,  and  his  hatred  of  wick- 
edness, it  came  to  pass  that  even  the  kings  themselves 
did  honor  the  place,  and  magnify  the  temple  with  their 
best  gifts :  and  insomuch  that  Seleucus,  king  of  Asia,  of 
his  own  revenue  bare  all  the  costs  belonging  to  the  serv- 
ice of  the  sacrifice."  The  reference  here  is  to  the  grant 
of  Antiochus  III  before  the  Romans  broke  his  power. 
But  all  the  treasure  cannot  remain  hidden  when  the  im- 
pecunious son  of  Antiochus  is  exacting  taxes. 

I  continue  to  quote:  "But  a  certain  Jew,  Simon,  of  the 
tribe  of  Benjamin,  who  was  made  governor  of  the  tem- 
ple, fell  out  with  the  high  priest  about  disorder  in  the 
city.  And  when  he  could  not  overcome  Onias,  he  got 
him  to  Apollonius,  the  son  of  Thraseas,  who  then  was 
governor  of  Coele-Syria  and  Phenice,  and  told  him  that 
the  treasury  at  Jerusalem  was  full  of  infinite  sums  of 
money,  so  that  the  multitude  of  their  riches  which  did  not 
pertain  to  the  account  of  the  sacrifices  was  innumerable, 
and  that  it  was  possible  to  bring  all  into  the  king's  hand. 
Now  when  Apollonius  came  to  the  king  and  had  showed 
him  of  the  money  whereof  he  was  told,  the  king  chose 
out  Heliodorus,  his  treasurer  (we  will  have  more  to  say 
about  him  later),  and  sent  him  with  a  commandment  to 
bring  the  aforesaid  money.  So  forthwith  Heliodorus 
took  his  journey,  under  color  of  visiting  the  cities  of 
Coele-Syria  and  Phenice,  but  indeed  to  fulfill  the  king's 
purpose.  And  when  he  was  come  to  Jerusalem,  and  had 
been  courteously  received  of  the  high  priest  of  the  city, 
he  told  him  what  intelligence  was  given  of  the  money 
(what  Simon  had  said  about  all  that  money  in  the  tem- 
ple) and  declared  wherefore  he  came,  and  asked  if  these 
things  were  so  indeed.  Then  the  high  priest  told  him 
that  there  was  such  money  laid  up  for  the  widows  and 


218  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

the  fatherless  children :  that  some  of  it  belonged  to  Hyr- 
canus,  son  of  Tobias,  a  man  of  great  dignity,  and  not  as 
that  wicked  Simon  had  misinformed:  the  sum  whereof 
was  in  all  400  talents  of  silver,  and  200  of  gold ;  and 
that  it  was  altogether  impossible  that  such  wrong  should 
be  done  unto  them  that  had  committed  it  to  the  holiness 
of  the  place,  and  to  the  majesty  and  inviolable  sanc- 
tity of  the  temple,  honored  over  all  the  world." 

Heliodorus  said :  "All  the  same  I  have  to  have  it."  The 
high  priest  fell  into  a  trance  in  which  his  face  was 
marked  ;  all  of  the  priests  commenced  praying,  the  women 
of  the  city  ran  out  into  the  streets,  the  children  and  the 
women,  in  view  of  such  sacrilege  as  was  contemplated, 
and  while  the  tears  ran  down  the  high  priest's  cheeks, 
he  led  this  prayer:  "Oh  Lord  God  Almighty,  intervene, 
and  prevent  this  horrible  sacrilege."  Whereupon,  as 
Heliodorus  entered  the  temple  he  met  two  flaming  angels, 
one  of  them  on  a  horse,  clothed  with  gold,  that  struck 
him  with  his  hoof  and  knocked  him  down.  The  shock 
nearly  took  away  his  life.  And  lest  Seleucus  might  mis- 
understand, the  high  priest  then  went  into  the  temple 
and  offered  sacrifice  unto  heaven  for  the  sin  of  Helio- 
dorus, and  asked  God  to  forgive  him  and  raise  him  up, 
and  on  the  intercession  of  the  high  priest  he  was  restored, 
and  returned  to  report  to  Seleucus  to  this  efifect:  "H  you 
have  any  man  in  your  kingdom  against  whom  you  have 
a  grudge — if  you  have  a  special  enemy — send  him  to  get 
that  money,  for  he  will  meet  a  doom  from  God  when  he 
seeks  to  violate  that  Holy  Place." 

I  cited  what  Daniel  said  about  Seleucus.  He  died  in 
12  years  by  poison,  and  that  brings  us  down  to  b.  c.  175. 
When  he  died  his  brother,  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  suc- 
ceeded him. 

What  a  temptation  it  is  to  me  when  I  come  in  touch 


ANTIOCHUS   III  AND   SELEUCUS   IV    219 

with  all  this  ancient  Jewish  history  and  so  many  wonder- 
ful things  related  concerning  it,  by  Greek  and  Roman 
historians,  both  ancient  and  modern,  to  switch  off  from 
the  main  point !  But  I  am  trying  to  limit  the  history  to 
its  contact  with  the  Jews,  and  to  do  this  I  must  condense 
two  or  three  thousand  pages  of  history  to  make  one 
chapter. 

QUESTIONS 

1.  What  the  scope  of  this  chapter? 

2.  Who  are  the  ancient  and  modern  historians  of  Rome  cov- 
ering this  period? 

3.  What  complicates  the  history  of  the  Ptolemies  and 
Seleucids? 

4.  What  prophet  forecasts  all  the  wars  between  these  two 
Greek  kingdoms,  and  what  the  sections  of  his  book  giving  them? 

5.  What  commentary  on  this  part  of  Daniel  is  commended, 
notwithstanding  the  author's  objectionable  radical  criticism  on 
other  parts  ? 

6.  What  great  battle  placed  Judea  under  the  Seleucids?  When 
and  where  fought? 

7.  How  did  the  Jews  receive  the  new  master? 

8.  How  did  Antiochus  evince  his  gratitude? 

9.  Compare  this  heathen  with  Louis  XIV  of  France  and  Philip 
II  of  Spain. 

10.  Compare  the  settlement  of  the  2,000  Jewish  families  with 
the  attitude  of  Episcopal  Virginia  toward  the  settlement  of  the 
Scotch-Irish  Presbyterians  in  the  Shenandoah  valley. 

11.  What  the  motives  prompting  Antiochus  to  give  in  marriage 
his  daughter  Cleopatra  to  Ptolemy,  and  how  did  the  marriage  fail 
of  its  purpose? 

12.  Cite  the  three  contacts  of  Antiochus  with  the  Romans,  and 
Mommsen's  comment  on  the  battle  of  Magnesia? 

13.  What  terms  did  the  Romans  exact  of  Antiochus  after  the 
battle  of  Magnesia,  what  parallel  in  modern  times,  and  their 
effect  on  the  subsequent  fortunes  of  the   Seleucids? 

14.  To  what  expedient  did  Antiochus  III  and  his  successors 
resort  for  means  to  pay  the  Roman  war  indemnity? 

15.  Why  were  temples  made  to  serve  as  banks  of  deposit? 

16.  Give  Daniel's  forecast  of  the  fate  of  Antiochus  III  and 
a  Jewish  account  of  its  fulfillment. 

17.  Give  Daniel's  forecast  of  Seleucus  IV,  successor  of  Anti- 
ochus III. 

18.  Give  substance  of  the  story  in  II  Maccabees  of  the  treas- 
ure in  the  temple,  how  Seleucus  heard  of  it,  and  his  failure 
to  get  it. 


XVIII 
ANTIOCHUS  EPIPHANES 

(b.  c.  175-164) 

THE  prophecies  of  Daniel  forecast  Antiochus  IV, 
surnamed  Epiphanes,  first,  in  Dan.  8:9-14,  in- 
terpreted by  8 :  23-26 ;  second,  Dan.  1 1 :  2-20.  The 
book  of  Daniel  covers  fairly  nearly  all  the  Inter-Biblical 
period.  We  stop  Daniel's  account  of  Antiochus  at  the 
20th  verse  of  the  nth  chapter,  and  do  not  go  on  to  the 
end  of  that  chapter,  as  all  radical  critic  commentaries 
do,  because  we  are  unable  to  apply  that  part  of  the  book 
of  Daniel  to  the  wars  of  the  Seleucids  and  the  Ptolemies. 
There  is  certainly  no  historical  verification  of  it  in  the 
life  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  My  theory  of  interpreting 
Dan.  11:21  to  the  end  of  the  chapter  (12:2)  is: 

First,  like  many  other  prophecies,  there  is  in  this 
part  of  Daniel  reference  to  some  things  near  at  hand 
and  some  things  far  distant — as  when  David's  prophecy 
of  Solomon's  kingdom  glides  into  the  far  remote  Messi- 
ah's kingdom  in  Psalms  45  and  72. 

This  blending  of  things  near  and  remote  arises  from 
the  perspective  in  prophecy.  It  may  be  illustrated  by 
the  appearance  of  a  far  distant  mountain  range.  Far-off, 
it  seems  to  be  one  mountain,  but  as  we  approach  nearer, 
the  one  mountain  becomes  a  range,  and  what  seemed  its 
high  point  is  a  succession  of  elevations,  far  apart  if  they 
are  viewed  laterally,  but  blended  into  one  peak  if  they 

220 


ANTIOCHUS  EPIPHANES  221 

are  in  one  line  of  vision  from  the  observer's  viewpoint. 

Second,  so  here,  seen  from  only  one  angle  of  prophetic 
vision,  Antiochus,  the  antichrist  of  his  day,  enemy  of 
the  Jews,  is  blended  with  a  far  more  remote  antichrist, 
an  enemy  of  the  Jews,  who  shall  try  to  destroy  them 
after  their  final  restoration  to  their  own  land,  and  whose 
own  destruction  results  in  the  salvation  of  all  the  Jewish 
nation,  which  we  have  presented  in  Revelation  19:  11-21, 
collated  with  Isaiah  63:  1-6;  Ezek.  36-37;  Zech,  12:8-14: 
II.  Now,  I  am  showing  how  to  study  this  chapter. 
First,  study  it  in  the  light  of  the  interpretation  of  that 
passage  in  Daniel. 

A  certain  part  of  the  books  of  the  Maccabees  touches 
the  reign  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes ;  viz:  I  Maccabees; 
first  six  chapters ;  II  Maccabees,  chapters  4  to  9.  There 
is  nowhere  a  better  statement  of  this  discussion  than  in 
those  chapters  from  the  books  of  Maccabees.    However, 

I  Maccabees  is  much  more  trustworthy  as  history  than 

II  Maccabees,  which  was  written  much  later. 

Certain  parts  of  Josephus  should  be  read  also  to  under- 
stand the  reign  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  viz:  "Antiquity 
of  the  Jews,"  Book  XII,  chapters  5  to  9.  But  I  Macca- 
bees is  more  reliable  as  history  than  Josephus. 

We  now  take  up  the  most  notable  matters  in  connec- 
tion with  the  reign  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  First,  we 
will  consider  the  man  himself.  His  father,  Antiochus 
the  Great,  died  leaving  him  as  hostage  in  Rome,  after  the 
great  battle  of  Magnesia.  While  in  Rome,  where  he 
grew  up,  he  became  carried  away  with  the  Roman  fashion 
of  admiring  the  Greek  cult.  The  second  fact  about  the 
man  himself  is  that  he  was  not  entitled  to  the  throne. 
His  older  brother,  Seleucus,  indeed  had  died,  but  Seleu- 
cus  had  a  son,  Demetrius,  a  little  fellow,  also  a  hostage 
in  Rome,  and  that  boy  was  the  rightful  king  of  Antioch. 


222  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

Daniel  tells  how  by  flattery  and  treachery  this  Antiochus 
usurped  the  place  of  his  young  nephew. 

The  next  thing  about  him  is  to  consider  his  character. 
Daniel  says  he  was  a  "vile  person."  He  is  the  little  horn 
of  the  8th  chapter  of  Daniel.  He  had  a  very  brilliant 
mind,  but  he  was  more  impressed  by  the  way  things 
seemed  than  the  way  things  were.  He  had  no  conscience 
about  sacred  things  at  all — indeed,  he  deified  himself.  In 
the  Cambridge  Bible  are  photographic  copies  of  some  of 
the  coins  he  issued,  and  on  those  coins  were  these  in- 
scriptions: "Antiochus  Basilanos  (king)  Theos  Epi- 
phanes  (God  manifest),  Nicephorus  (victory  bearer)." 
The  last  is  the  title  of  Jupiter,  "Victory  bearer,"  and  he 
had  the  artist  who  drew  the  plans  for  these  coins  to 
make  his  face  on  the  coins  resemble  the  face  of  Jupiter, 
as  presented  in  his  statues.  It  needed  some  change  to 
make  it  look  like  that,  but  he  did  not  mind  it. 

So  much  for  the  man.  We  will  now  consider  the 
events.  At  the  close  of  his  brother's  reign,  Onias  III, 
the  good  high  priest,  had  gone  to  Antioch  to  remove  the 
impression  about  the  temple  treasury  that  had  been  made 
by  Simon,  and  Onias  is  in  Antioch  when  Antiochus  Epi- 
phanes  comes  to  the  throne.  A  brother  of  Onias,  named 
Joshua,  who  had  become  an  infidel  Jew  and  changed  his 
name  to  Jason,  then  went  to  see  Antiochus,  and  con- 
vinced him  that  he  would  make  a  good  deal  more  money 
if  he  would  depose  Onias  and  make  him,  Jason,  the  high 
priest ;  that  he  was  already  Hellenized  and  believed  in 
the  Greek  religion,  and  it  would  be  a  great  help  if  Anti- 
ochus would  make  him  high  priest.  So  Antiochus  kept 
Onias  there  until  he  died.  He  never  saw  his  home  any 
more,  and  this  renegade  Jew,  Jason,  was  made  high 
priest 

I  am  glad  to  notice  that  a  great  while  after  that,  a 


ANTIOCHUS  EPIPHANES  223 

still  greater  renegade  Jew,  Menelaus,  being  sent  to  Anti- 
och  by  Jason,  persuaded  Antiochus  to  depose  Jason  and 
make  him  (Menelaus)  the  high  priest,  and  he  would  get 
a  better  bargain  still.  So  one  thief  turns  out  another,  and 
Menelaus  was  made  high  priest.  He  made  no  pretensions 
to  the  observances  of  the  Jewish  religion.  Jason,  to 
show  how  much  he  was  Hellenized,  erected  in  the  Holy 
City,  a  Greek  gymnasium.  In  these  athletic  days,  when 
the  schools  are  all  turning  almost  exclusively  to  athletics, 
and  the  glory  of  a  school  is  its  athletics,  we  may  under- 
stand what  a  baleful  influence  that  gymnasium  would 
have  in  Jerusalem,  for  both  Jason  and  Menelaus,  who 
succeeded  him,  persuaded  the  Jews  that  the  best  thing 
to  do  would  be  to  attend  that  Greek  theatre  and  let  their 
temple  alone.  No  Sunday  moving-picture  show  in  mod- 
ern times  so  nearly  breaks  up  worship  as  did  that  Greek 
theatre  in  Jerusalem. 

The  next  event  in  connection  with  the  reign  of  Anti- 
ochus was  his  purpose  to  bring  Egypt  into  his  realm. 
His  satrap,  Apollonius,  informed  him  that  two  men  in 
Egypt  had  charge  of  the  little  king,  the  nephew  of  Anti- 
ochus. Cleopatra,  a  sister  of  Antiochus,  was  sent  over 
there  to  become  the  wife  of  one  of  the  Ptolomies.  I 
have  already  shown  what  a  good  woman  she  was.  Now, 
her  little  son  at  this  time  was  king  of  Egypt,  but  those 
who  had  charge  of  the  boy  after  his  mother  died  were 
renegades.  This  satrap  persuaded  Antiochus  that  if  he 
would  make  a  demonstration  in  Egypt,  he  could  easily 
capture  the  whole  country.  Now  in  order  to  make  every- 
thing clear  behind  him,  he  made  his  first  visit  to  Jeru- 
salem, where  the  renegade  high  priest  received  him  with 
open  arms,  and  made  great  promises  about  what  he  was 
going  to  do  for  the  Jews.  He  then  led  his  first  expedi- 
tion into  Egypt  and  captured  Pelusium,  a  port  of  Egypt, 


224  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

on  one  of  the  mouths  of  the  Nile.  The  young  king  tried 
to  flee,  but  his  renegade  tutor  betrayed  him  to  Antiochus, 
who  caught  him  and  pretended  to  act  in  his  name.  He 
subjugated  nearly  all  Egypt,  and  issued  some  of  those 
coins  I  told  about  and  had  himself  crowned  there. 

While  he  was  over  there,  however,  the  report  reached 
Jerusalem  that  he  had  been  killed.  Whereupon  the  su- 
perseded Jason,  whom  I  told  about,  and  who  had  fled 
over  the  Jordan,  collected  a  thousand  men,  returned  to 
Jerusalem  and  tried  to  depose  Menelaus,  Antiochus 
hears  of  it,  and  thinks  it  to  be  a  revolt  of  the  Jews 
against  his  authority.  So  he  comes  back  by  Jerusalem, 
murders  thousands  of  its  people  in  cold  blood,  enters 
the  temple,  takes  away  the  sacred  vessels,  and  among 
them  the  famous  golden  candlesticks,  and  robs  the  tem- 
ple of  its  treasure,  and  Menelaus  helps  him  in  all  of  it. 
He  then  made  a  second  expedition  into  Egypt,  b.  c.  169, 
and  recaptured  all  of  the  country  except  Alexandria, 
which  held  out. 

He  returns  again,  continuing  all  this  time  his  oppres- 
sion of  the  Jews,  and  makes  a  third  expedition  into 
Egypt.  Cleopatra,  that  good  woman  I  told  about,  had 
left  two  sons,  and  these  two  boys  had  fled  to  Rome  and 
appealed  for  help.  Rome  sent  an  embassy  to  warn  Anti- 
ochus to  let  the  Egyptians  alone. 

When  Antiochus  was  within  four  miles  of  Alexandria 
the  Roman  embassy  met  him.  The  leader  of  it  was 
Popilius.  The  Roman  had  nothing  but  his  staff  in  his 
hand.    He  lifted  his  staff  and  said : 

"In  the  name  of  the  Senate  of  Rome  I  command  you 
to  go  back  to  your  own  country  and  let  Egypt  alone." 
Antiochus  said : 

"I  will  call  a  council  of  my  friends  and  take  it  into 
consideration." 


ANTIOCHUS  EPIPHANES  225 

The  Roman  stopped  and  drew  a  circle  around  him  in 
the  sand  and  said : 

"You  will  answer  me  before  you  get  out  of  that  cir- 
cle, yes  or  no." 

Those  Romans  were  stern  fellows.     Antiochus  said: 

"Yes,"  and  went  home,  but  he  went  home  mad. 

The  Romans  made  him  abandon  all  his  conquests  in 
Eg>'pt  and  the  Mediterranean  islands.  Being  exceedingly 
mad,  he  sent  his  general,  Apollinius,  to  Jerusalem  with 
instructions  to  make  all  Ceole-Syria  adopt  the  Greek 
religion  and  particularly  required  the  Jews  to  abandon 
their  religion. 

The  general  captured  Jerusalem,  tore  down  its  walls, 
and  erected  a  fortification  that  commanded  the  temple. 
He  erected  a  Greek  altar  to  Jupiter  right  on  top  of  Je- 
hovah's brazen  altar,  and  sacrificed  a  sow,  the  abomin- 
able flesh  to  a  Jew,  and  took  the  broth  and  flung  it  all 
over  the  Holy  Place,  and  had  filth  cast  into  the  Most 
Holy  Place,  and  commanded  every  Jew  that  had  a  Bible 
to  bring  it  to  him,  and  he  tore  their  holy  books  to  pieces 
and  burnt  their  fragments.  He  issued  an  order  that  no 
child  should  be  circumcised,  and  when  some  of  the 
women  disobeyed  he  had  their  babies  killed  and  tied 
around  their  necks  and  then  murdered  the  women.  He 
then  made  every  one  that  professed  to  be  a  Jew  come 
up  and  eat  swine's  flesh. 

There  was  one  old  Jew  named  Eleazer,  so  devout  and 
venerable  that  even  the  Hellenizing  Jews  loved  him. 
They  told  him  they  did  not  want  to  see  him  die,  and  to 
bring  a  piece  of  other  meat  with  him  and  eat  that  so  that 
it  would  seem  that  he  had  eaten  the  hog's  meat.  But 
he  said,  "No,  this  is  no  time  for  compromising;  if  I 
would  even  seem  to  eat  the  swine's  flesh  my  name  would 
be  disgraced.     I  am  an  old  man,  and  a  few  days  more 


226  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

or  less  matters  nothing  to  me.  Kill  me.  I  will  not  vio- 
late my  law."    And  so  they  murdered  him. 

A  much  more  notable  event  we  find  in  II  Maccabees, 
concerning  a  pious  widow  and  her  five  boys.  I  lift  my  hat 
to  them  every  time  I  think  about  them.  This  woman 
and  her  five  sons  were  commanded  to  violate  the  laws. 
She  exhorted  her  boys  to  be  faithful.  They  scalped 
the  oldest  one,  and  put  coals  of  fire  on  his  head,  after 
taking  the  skin  oflf,  and  then  killed  him,  his  mother  look- 
ing on.  But  she  exhorted  the  other  four  to  be  faithful. 
They  killed  the  second  one  by  horrible  torture,  and  she 
exhorted  the  other  three  to  be  faithful.  And  they  killed 
the  third  and  fourth  the  same  way.  She  turned  to  her 
baby  boy,  her  youngest,  the  pride  and  darling  of  her 
heart,  and  told  him  that  his  mother  was  expecting  him 
to  be  true  to  his  God  and  his  religion,  and  they  tortured 
him  to  death,  and  she  kept  on  praising  Jehovah  until 
they  put  her  to  death. 

I  read  that  when  I  was  ten  years  old,  and  it  struck  me 
as  being  one  of  the  heroic  things  in  history.  It  is  to 
such  events  that  a  certain  passage  in  Hebrews  ii  refers. 

The  old  proverb  is:  "When  you  double  the  tale  of 
the  brick,  then  comes  Moses."  So  now  there  arose  in 
Judea  an  order  called  Asideans,  pious  people  who  pre- 
ferred religion  to  everything  else,  and  they  entered  into 
a  solemn  covenant  to  stand  by  the  faith.  When  they  were 
attacked  on  Saturday,  their  Sabbath,  because  they  would 
not  fight  on  the  holy  day,  they  submitted  to  death  with- 
out defence;  i,ooo  were  murdered  at  one  time,  as  on 
another  occasion  their  priests  had  been  done  in  the  tem- 
ple, who  kept  on  offering  incense  and  worshipping  God 
until  they  were  slain  at  the  altar. 

There  was  a  man  named  Asmon,  from  whom  we  get 
the  name  Asmoneans.    A  descendant  of  Asmon,  an  old 


ANTIOCHUS  EPIPHANES  227 

Jew,  a  perfect  giant,  named  Mattathias,  had  five  sons, 
vigorous  men,  named  John,  Simon,  Judas,  Eleazar,  and 
Jonathan,  and  the  history  of  this  old  man  and  his  five 
sons  is  more  memorable  than  the  history  of  the  woman 
and  her  five  sons.  He  determined  that  he  would  not  be 
passive  if  they  attacked  him  on  the  Sabbath,  but  that 
he  would  fight,  and  that  he  would  not  consent  to  the 
destruction  of  the  Jewish  religion.  When  the  deputies 
of  Antiochus  came  to  Samaria  with  the  demand  to  adopt 
the  Greek  religion,  they  submitted  at  once,  and  dedicated 
their  temple  to  Jupiter  and  joined  Antiochus  in  fighting 
the  Jews,  as  usual.  Finally  a  deputy  reached  the  little 
village  where  Mattathias  lived,  and  commanded  him  to 
obey  the  law.  He  said,  "I  obey  God's  law."  They  then 
called  up  another  Jew  who  offered  to  obey  the  law,  and 
when  he  started  to  do  it  Mattathias  killed  him,  and  then 
killed  the  deputy,  and  tore  down  the  heathen  altar.  He 
and  his  sons  went  all  over  the  country  tearing  down  the 
heathen  altars. 

The  old  man,  seeing  he  was  about  to  die,  appointed 
his  son  Judas  to  have  charge  of  the  army — Judas,  sur- 
named  Maccabeus.  Maccabeus  means  "hammerer;" 
Judas  the  Hammerer.  Edward  H  of  England,  was  called 
"the  hammerer  of  the  Scots,"  and  in  Westminster  Abbey 
there  is  the  inscription :  "Edward,  Hammerer  of  the 
Scots."  In  Jane  Porter's  "Scottish  Chiefs"  is  given  the 
history  of  William  Wallace  redeeming  Scotland  from 
the  bondage  to  which  Edward  the  Hammerer  had  sub- 
jected it.  I  used  to  read  it  and  cry.  No  hero  of  history 
comes  nearer  being  like  William  Wallace  than  Judas, 
the  Hammerer.  His  life,  even  as  told  by  his  enemies, 
and  particularly  the  account  by  the  Jewish  historians, 
surpasses  anything  in  history,  showing  the  heroic  force 
of  a  man  fighting  for  his  religion  and  his  country. 


228  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

I  remember  once,  when  I  was  a  school  boy,  I  had  to 
recite  Fitz-Green  Hallock's  poem,  "Marco  Boyario" — 
Greeks  fighting  Turks  (just  as  they  are  doing  now)  ;  that 
part  of  it  where  the  Turk  awoke  to  hear  his  sentry 
shriek :  "To  arms !  They  come !  The  Greek !  The 
Greek !"  when  he  awoke  to  hear  Bouaris  cry : 

"Strike  till  the  last  armed  foe  expires ! 
"Strike  for  your  altars  and  your  fires ! 
"God  and  your  native  land," 

may  be  given  an  original  turn  by  applying  it  to  Judas 
Maccabeus.  The  reader  should  cover  the  whole  period, 
and  even  its  approaches,  by  giving  some  account  in  or- 
der of  the  following  battles: 

1.  Marathon,  Salamis,  Thermopylae,  Plataea,  Cunaxa. 

2.  Granicus,  Issus,  Arbela. 

3.  Ipsus,  Raphia,  Paneas,  Magnesia. 

4.  Beth-horon,  Emmaus,  Beth-zur,  Beth-zecharias,  Ca- 
pharsalama,  Adasa,  Eleasa. 

5.  Pharsalia,  Philippi,  Actium. 

These  five  series  of  battles  give  an  outline  of  the  pe- 
riod. The  fourth  series  names  not  all  but  the  most  of 
the  great  battles  fought  by  Judas  Maccabeus.  None  of 
these,  however,  come  within  three  of  his  greatest  cam- 
paigns, to-wit,  the  redemption  of  Galilee,  the  conquests 
east  of  the  Jordan,  and  the  war  against  Edom. 

Judas  then  brought  Esau  back  to  Jacob.  He  con- 
quered Edom  that  had  helped  always  in  oppressing  Judah, 
and  from  that  time  on  Esau  and  Jacob  were  together. 
He  and  his  brothers  crossed  the  Jordan  and  drove  the 
armies  of  Antiochus  out  of  that  country ;  they  redeemed 
Galilee,  and  brought  back  to  Jerusalem  the  persecuted 
Jews  that  were  there.  Antiochus,  in  the  meantime,  had 
left  a  general  to  take  charge  of  his  army  and  continue 


ANTIOCHUS  EPIPHANES  229 

the  war  against  the  Jews,  while  he  went  on  a  temple- 
robbing  expedition,  like  his  father  before  him,  and  the 
same  temple  at  Elymais.  When  he  got  there  the  gates 
were  shut  against  him  and  he  could  not  rob  that  temple. 
While  there  he  heard  the  account  of  the  overthrow  of 
his  army  by  Judas  Maccabeus. 

I  will  close  this  chapter  by  giving  an  account  of  Anti- 
ochus'  death,  from  I  Maccabees,  in  the  149th  year  (not 
of  his  age,  but  of  the  Greek  Supremacy)  :  "Now,  when 
the  king  heard  these  words  [about  the  defeat  of  his 
armies  by  Judas]  he  was  astonished  and  sore  moved; 
wherepon  he  laid  him  down  upon  his  bed,  and  fell  sick 
for  grief,  because  it  had  not  befallen  him  as  he  looked 
for.  And  there  he  continued  many  days :  for  his  grief 
was  ever  more  and  more,  and  he  made  account  that  he 
should  die.  Wherefore,  he  called  for  all  his  friends  and 
said  unto  them:  'The  sleep  is  gone  from  mine  eyes,  and 
my  heart  faileth  for  very  care.  And  I  thought  with  my- 
self into  what  tribulations  am  I  come,  and  how  great  a 
flood  of  misery  it  is,  wherein  now  I  am!  for  I  was  boun- 
tiful and  beloved  in  my  power.  But  now  I  remember  the 
evils  that  I  did  at  Jerusalem,  and  that  I  took  all  the  ves- 
sels of  gold  and  silver  that  were  therein,  and  sent  to 
destroy  the  inhabitants  of  Judea  without  cause.  I  per- 
ceive, therefore,  that  these  troubles  have  come  upon  me, 
and  behold  I  perish  through  great  grief  in  a  strange 
land.'  Then  called  he  for  Philip,  one  of  his  friends, 
whom  he  made  ruler  over  all  his  realm,  and  gave  him  the 
crown,  and  his  robe,  and  his  signet,  to  the  end  he  should 
bring  up  his  son  Antiochus,  and  nourish  him  up  for  the 
kingdom." 

The  account  of  his  death  in  II  Maccabees,  which  is 
not  as  good  history  as  I  Maccabees,  is  varied  from  the 
account  in  the  first  book  and  less  historical. 


jeSO         THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 


QUESTIONS 

t.    What  the  subject  and  period  of  this  chapter? 

2.  What  sections  of  Daniel  refer  to  this  man? 

3.  Why  not  apply  Dan.  ii :  20-12  :  i  to  the  war  of  the  Seleucids 
and  Ptolemies? 

4.  What  parts  of  the  books  of  the  Maccabees  refer  to  Anti- 
ochus  Epiphanes? 

5.  What  parts  of  Josephus? 

6.  How  was  Antiochus  a  usurper? 

7.  Give  his  character. 

8.  How  does  his  blasphemy  appear  on  the  coins  issued  by  him? 

9.  Give,  in  order  of  time,  the  first  relations  of  Antiochus  to 
the  Jews  as  presented  in  the  history  of  three  high  priests,  Onias, 
Jason  and  Menelaus. 

ID.  What  the  effect  on  Jewish  temple  worship  of  Jason's  Greek 
gymnasium?     Illustrate  by  events  of  our  day. 

11.  How  and  through  whom  was  Antiochus  persuaded  to  add 
Egypt  to  his  realm? 

12.  Tell  of  his  first  visit  to  Jerusalem  and  his  promises. 

13.  What  occurred  at  Jerusalem  while  he  was  in  Egypt  to 
inflame  his  mind  against  that  city,  and  what  the  result  of  his 
second  visit  on  his  return  from  Egypt? 

14.  Give  the  dramatic  account  of  his  retirement  from  Egypt 
on  the  third  invasion. 

15.  In  his  fury  against  Jerusalem  what  fearful  havoc  was 
wrought  there  by  his  general  Apollonius? 

16.  In  this  case  what  was  the  "Abomination  of  Desolation" 
spoken  of  by  Daniel  the  prophet? 

17.  In  that  case  how  do  you  explain  Matt.  24:  15? 

18.  How  does  Daniel  give  the  time  from  this  desecration  of 
the  temple  by  Antiochus  to  its  cleansing  by  Judas  Maccabeus,  and 
what  is  the  time  in  years? 

19.  What  general  policy  looking  to  uniformity  in  religion  did 
Antiochus  now  adopt  and  its  sweeping  character  toward  the 
Jews? 

20.  How  did  Samaria  respond  to  this  religious  demand? 

21.  Cite  two  notable  instances  of  Jewish  martyrdom  from 
II  Maccabees? 

22.  Who  were  the  Asideans,  and  what  their  attitude  toward 
this  religious  persecution? 

23.  What  massacre  of  them  occurred,  and  why  did  they  not 
resist? 

24.  Tell  about  Mattathias  and  his  sons,  the  commencement 
of  their  revolt,  and  their  policy  of  fighting  on  the  Sabbath. 

25.  Of  whom  was  Mattathias  a  descendant,  and  what  long  line 
was  named  after  this  ancestor,  and  can  you  tell  now  the  person 
of  the  line  and  her  fate? 

26.  In  view  of  death  to  whom  did  Mattathias  commit  the  mili- 
tary lead,  and  to  whom  the  high-priesthood? 


ANTIOCHUS  EPIPHANES  231 

27.  What  the  meaning  of  "Maccabeus"  and  what  English  king 
bore  a  similar  cognomen? 

28.  To  what  Scottish  hero  may  Judas  Maccabeus  be  compared? 

29.  What  great  battles  did  he  fight,  and  in  which  two  was  he 
defeated? 

30.  Can  you  name  the  most  distinguished  generals  of  Anti- 
ochus  against  whom  he  fought? 

31.  Describe  some  of  his  campaigns,  particularly  in  Galilee, 
east  of  the  Jordan,  and  against  Edom. 

Z2.  Up  to  what  point  in  his  conquests  did  all  the  pious  Jews 
support  him,  and  for  what  was  he  striving  beyond  that  point? 

2,7>.  Where  do  we  find  two  variant  accounts  of  the  death  of 
Antiochus  and  which  the  most  historical? 

34.  Describe  his  horrible  death. 

35.  What  five  series  of  battles  give  a  battle-history  of  the 
Inter-Biblical  period  and  its  approaches? 

Z(>.  At  the  close  of  the  study  of  the  period  be  ready  to  date 
and  analyze  these  battles,  and  tell  their  leaders  and  the  issues 
decided  by  them. 

Z7.  By  the  conquest  of  Edom  Judas  Maccabeus  annexed  Esau 
to  Jacob.  How  can  you  anticipate  subsequent  history  by  show- 
ing how  this  annexation  ultimately  resulted  in  placing  both  Esau 
and  Ishmael  on  the  throne  of  Jacob  in  one  obnoxious  person  ? 


XIX 

THE  MACCABEES 

(b.  c.  164-65,  About  100  Years) 

WE  HAVE  about  100  years  of  exciting  history 
to  consider  in  this  chapter.  Our  last  chapter 
closed  with  Judas  Maccabeus  in  power,  and 
with  Menelaus,  the  renegade  Jew,  as  high  priest  ap- 
pointed by  the  Syrian  king.  Menelaus,  having  been 
driven  out  by  Judas,  made  an  appeal  to  the  king  at  An- 
tioch,  and  a  number  of  the  Jews  sided  with  him — those 
who  had  gone  into  copying  the  Greek  spirit.  He  went 
to  the  king  at  Antioch  and  told  him  that  Judas  had 
driven  out  all  his  friends  and  was  taking  the  country 
away  from  the  Seleucids  at  Antioch,  whereupon  the 
Syrian  king  sent  against  Judas  the  old  general,  Lysias, 
who  had  served  under  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  with  a  great 
army.  They  went  down  on  the  east  side  of  the  Jordan 
and  around  the  Dead  Sea,  and  came  up  on  the  south. 
It  was  a  very  strong  army.  Judas,  at  that  time  besieging 
the  stronghold  in  Jerusalem  still  held  by  a  garrison  of  the 
Syrian  king,  had  to  rush  hurriedly  to  meet  this  vast 
invasion  with  a  very  inferior  force,  about  3,000  men. 
Many  of  the  3,000  advised  him  not  to  fight — that  it  was 
impossible  for  3,000  Jews  to  overcome  such  a  host  as 
stood  opposed  to  him.  The  battlefield  was  at  Beth- 
Zecharias.  But  Judas  fought  anyhow — he  always  fought. 
A  great  many  elephants  were  in  the  army  o-f  Lysias, 
and  one  of  them  being  larger  than  the  others  and  having 

232 


THE  MACCABEES  23S 

more  gorgeous  trappings,  was  supposed  by  Eleazar  to 
carry  the  commander-in-chief,  Lysias.  So  he  dashed 
forward  alone  and  got  under  the  elephant  and,  stabbing 
upward,  killed  him.  But  the  elephant  in  falling  crushed 
Eleazar  and  killed  him.  Judas  was  defeated  and  fell 
back  on  Jerusalem.  Lysias,  when  he  got  in  sight  of 
Jerusalem  and  saw  how  formidable  were  the  prepara- 
tions made  by  Judas,  and  being  very  much  disturbed  by 
the  fear  of  the  increasing  Roman  power,  advised  Anti- 
ochus  to  make  peace,  and  so  peace  was  made  on  the 
condition  that  the  Jews  were  forever  after  to  be  free 
in  their  religion,  but  remain  subject  to  the  Syrian  gov- 
ernment. 

This  peace  secured  the  main  thing  for  which  the  war 
was  undertaken  by  Judas'  father,  Mattathias,  and  the 
Pharisees  from  this  time  on  were  opposed  to  the  war. 
That  is,  they  cared  very  little  about  political  freedom. 
They  were  willing  enough  to  be  subordinate  to  another 
government  if  they  were  allowed  to  retain  their  religion. 
And  about  this  time  the  renegade,  Menelaus,  died.  From 
this  time  on  the  war  between  the  Maccabees  and  Syria 
was  a  political  rather  than  a  religious  war. 

Just  about  this  time  the  right  heir  to  the  throne  at 
Antioch,  Demetrius  I,  surnamed  Soter,  came  to  Antioch, 
dethroned  the  son  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  and  killed 
him  and  Lysias,  the  general.  Now  comes  to  the  front 
Alcimus — a  man  as  bad  as  Menelaus  or  Jason.  He  wants 
to  be  high  priest.  He  is  thoroughly  filled  with  the  Hel- 
lenistic spirit,  and  in  favor  of  Syrian  domination.  Deme- 
trius appoints  him  high  priest,  and  sends  John  Bacchides 
with  an  army  to  install  him  in  office.  The  Pharisees 
thought  they  could  accept  him  as  high  priest,  inasmuch 
as  he  was  a  descendant  of  Aaron,  in  spite  of  the  warning 
of  Judas.    But  Alcimus,  with  Bacchides  and  his  army  to 


«S4.  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

help  him,  killed  a  portion  of  the  noblest  of  the  inhabitants 
of  Jerusalem  in  cold  blood.  Judas  comes  and  drives  out 
Alcimus,  who  makes  a  second  appeal  to  Demetrius.  De- 
metrius sends  another  great  army  to  meet  this  great  host 
of  Syrians  at  the  battle  of  Capharsalama,  in  Joshua's 
old  battlefield  at  Beth-horon.  Judas  twice  overwhelm- 
ingly defeats  the  Syrian  general,  kills  him,  and  brings 
such  spoils  to  Jerusalem  as  had  not  been  seen  for  years. 

Just  at  this  time  Judas  began  to  be  depressed  in  mind, 
thinking  how  often  he  had  to  fight  great  armies  with  only 
a  handful  of  men,  so  he  made  an  appeal  to  Rome — which 
was  a  mistake  on  his  part.  Woe  to  the  nation  that  ever 
appealed  to  Rome!  He  made  an  appeal  to  Rome  and 
sent  an  embassy  empowered  to  enter  into  a  treaty  of 
alliance  with  Rome,  and  also  with  Sparta  in  Greece.  That 
treaty  was  made,  but  Judas  was  dead  before  the  news 
came.  The  following  is  the  treaty,  from  the  45th  page 
of  I  Maccabees : 

"Good  success  to  the  Romans,  and  to  the  people  of 
the  Jews,  by  land  and  by  sea  forever ;  the  sword  also  and 
enemy  be  far  from  them.  If  there  comes  first  any  war 
upon  the  Romans,  or  any  of  their  confederates  through- 
out all  their  dominion,  the  people  of  the  Jews  shall  help 
them  with  victuals,  vessels,  money,  or  ships,  as  it  hath 
seemed  good  unto  the  Romans ;  but  they  shall  keep  their 
covenants  without  taking  anything  therefor.  In  the  same 
manner,  also,  if  war  come  first  upon  the  Jews,  the  Ro- 
mans shall  help  them  with  all  their  hearts,  according  as 
the  time  shall  be  appointed  them;  neither  shall  victuals 
be  given  them  that  take  part  against  them,  or  weapons, 
or  money,  or  ships,  as  it  hath  seemed  good  to  the  Ro- 
mans, but  they  shall  keep  their  covenants,  and  that 
without  deceit.  According  to  these  articles  did  the  Ro- 
mans make  a  covenant  with  the  Jews.    Howbeit  if  here- 


THE  MACCABEES  235 

after  the  one  party  or  the  other  shall  think  meet  to  add  or 
diminish  anything,  they  may  do  it  at  their  pleasures,  and 
whatsoever  they  shall  add  or  take  away  shall  be  ratified. 
And  as  touching  the  evils  that  Demetrius  doeth  to  the 
Jews,  we  have  written  unto  him,  saying,  wherefore  hast 
thou  made  thy  yoke  heavy  upon  our  friends  and  confed- 
erates, the  Jews?  If  therefore  they  complain  any  more 
against  thee,  we  will  do  them  justice,  and  fight  with 
thee  by  sea  and  by  land." 

Now  that  is  what  is  called  a  treaty  of  alliance,  oflfensive 
and  defensive.  An  embassy  had  been  sent  to  Sparta  as 
well  as  to  Rome,  and  here  is  the  most  singular  document 
of  history  that  came  from  the  Spartans : 

"Areus,  king  of  the  Lacedaemonians,  to  Onias,  the  high 
priest,  Greeting:  It  is  found  in  writing  that  the  Lacedae- 
monians and  the  Jews  are  brethren,  and  that  they  are 
of  the  stock  of  Abraham:  now,  therefore,  since  this  has 
come  to  our  knowledge,  ye  shall  do  well  to  write  unto  us 
of  your  prosperity.  We  do  write  back  again  unto  you 
that  your  cattle  and  goods  are  ours,  and  that  ours  are 
yours.  We  do  commend,  therefore,  our  ambassadors  to 
make  report  unto  you  on  this  wise." 

If  I  had  that  king  of  the  Spartans  before  me,  I  would 
ask  for  a  sight  of  the  document  proving  that  the  Spar- 
tans, like  the  Jews,  were  the  descendants  of  Abraham. 
I  would  like  to  see  how  he  makes  out  his  case.  I  can- 
not do  it.     That  is  a  singular  claim. 

Let  us  now  consider  the  death  of  Judas,  which  took 
place  before  the  knowledge  of  the  Roman  treaty  came 
to  him.  Demetrius  had  sent  a  still  greater  army  under 
Bacchides,  and  sent  back  Alcimus,  the  high  priest.  Judas 
met  him  at  Eleasa ;  Judas  had  3,000  men,  but  Bacchides 
had  22,000  men.  The  men  of  Judas'  army  could  not 
stand  to  face  such  a  multitude  and  they  went  home  and 


236  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

left  him  with  only  800  men.  He  said,  "It  is  not  for  me 
to  flee;  what  if  I  am  killed,  I  perish  for  my  country," 
Never  did  800  men  make  a  braver  fight  than  they  made 
at  Eleasa;  but  the  little  Jewish  force  was  destroyed, 
except  a  very  few,  and  Judas  was  killed.  His  brothers 
and  Simon  rescued  the  body  and  buried  it  in  the  family 
cemetery,  beside  the  aged  father  and  the  other  brother 
that  had  fallen.  That  was  in  b.  c.  161 ;  Jonathan  was 
then  made  both  high  priest  and  commander-in-chief.  We 
have  seen  two  of  Mattathias'  sons  pass  away — Judas  and 
Eleazar.  Jonathan  is  now  the  commander-in-chief,  and 
about  this  time  Alcimus  died. 

I  must  now  refer  to  an  event,  one  of  the  most  impor- 
tant in  the  Inter-Biblical  period.  It  took  place  b.  c.  160: 
Onias  IV,  the  son  of  the  good  and  pious  Onias,  whom 
Antiochus  had  killed,  went  to  Egypt.  He  was  entitled 
to  the  priesthood,  but  he  did  not  believe  there  would  ever 
be  any  chance  to  have  regular  worship  at  Jerusalem,  so 
he  asked  the  Ptolemies  to  have  a  temple  built  in  Egypt. 
He  read  to  him  a  verse  from  Isaiah  (19th  chapter  and 
19th  verse)  :  "In  that  day  shall  there  be  an  altar  to  Jeho- 
vah in  the  midst  of  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  a  pillar  at  the 
border  thereof  to  Jehovah."  Onias  quoted  that  passage 
from  Isaiah,  and  a  temple  was  erected  at  Leontopolis, 
or  On,  that  stood  as  long  as  the  temple  at  Jerusalem.  So 
now  there  are  three  temples:  one  at  Jerusalem,  the 
Samaritan  temple,  still  standing,  and  the  temple  over 
in  Egypt. 

The  next  important  event  is  that  Bacchides,  finding 
out  that  Jonathan  was  as  wise  as  Judas,  and  that  the 
people  were  going  to  stand  by  him,  made  a  treaty  of  peace 
with  Jonathan,  agreeing  that  Jonathan  should  take  the 
office  of  high  priest  which  the  Jews  had  conferred  upon 
him. 


THE  MACCABEES  237 

We  now  come  to  another  very  important  event.  In 
B.  c.  153,  Alexander,  a  son  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes, 
claimed  to  be  the  legitimate  ruler  of  Syria,  and  opposed 
Demetrius.  Both  of  them,  Demetrius  and  Alexander, 
began  to  make  bids  for  Jonathan's  help.  Jonathan  is  now 
the  arbitrator  of  the  war — he  has  the  ball  at  his  feet  and 
keeps  it  rolling  between  these  two,  and  each  one  keeps 
raising  his  bid  as  to  what  he  would  do  if  Jonathan  would 
lead  the  Jews  to  support  him.  Jonathan  accepted  the 
proposition  of  Alexander.  To  further  strengthen  him- 
self, Alexander  entered  into  a  treaty  of  peace  with 
Ptolemy,  king  of  Egypt.  This  treaty  was  based  upon 
a  marriage  between  Alexander  and  Cleopatra,  the  daugh- 
ter of  the  Ptolemies  and  the  Seleucids.  But  Ptolemy  be- 
gins to  change  his  policy  of  friendship  toward  Alexander, 
wishing  to  make  himself  ruler  of  the  kingdom  of  the 
Seleucids.  To  this  end  he  negotiates  a  treaty  with  Deme- 
trius, the  contestant  for  the  throne  of  the  Seleucids 
against  Alexander,  and  promises  to  take  his  daughter, 
Cleopatra,  away  from  Alexander  and  give  her  to  Deme- 
trius. I  wonder  how  the  woman  felt  in  being  swapped  off 
that  way — first  to  one  man,  then  to  another,  for  political 
reasons.  The  daughters  of  kings  have  a  hard  time  of  it 
on  the  marriage  question,  since  they  are  disposed  of  for 
political  reasons  without  regard  for  their  own  will  or 
affections. 

I  have  not  the  space  to  continue  the  history  of  the  Mac- 
cabees in  detail.  It  is  suf^cient  to  say  that  Jonathan,  who 
succeeded  Judas,  was  not  only  a  great  general,  but  a 
great  diplomatist.  He  maintained  his  treaties  of  peace 
with  the  Romans  and  Lacedaemonians ;  he  won  many 
important  victories  and  established  himself  thoroughly 
in  the  affections  of  the  people,  and  enlarged  the  territory 
of  his  country. 


238  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

The  tragic  termination  of  his  life  was  on  this  wise: 
A  certain  Trypho,  minister  and  general  of  Alexander, 
began  to  aspire  to  be  king  at  Antioch  himself,  and  know- 
ing that  the  most  formidable  adversary  in  his  way  was 
Jonathan  and  the  Jewish  army,  he  ensnared  Jonathan 
under  false  pretenses  to  visit  at  Ptolemais.  Jonathan 
accepted  the  invitation,  taking  with  him  only  a  thousand 
men.  As  soon  as  they  entered  the  city  the  gates  were 
closed,  the  thousand  men  were  killed  and  Jonathan  placed 
in  prison.  Jonathan's  brother  Simon  raised  an  army  to 
rescue  his  brother,  and  Trypho,  dreading  the  result  of  an 
engagement,  proffered  to  restore  Jonathan  for  an  im- 
mense sum  of  money,  and  provided  that  Jonathan's  sons 
be  left  with  him  as  hostages.  Simon  sent  the  money  and 
the  boys.  Trypho  kept  the  money  and  put  Jonathan  to 
death.  Simon  then  succeeded  Jonathan  as  both  high 
priest  and  commander-in-chief.  We  find  his  great  his- 
tory set  forth  in  detail  in  the  first  book  af  Maccabees. 
He  brought  the  Jews  into  great  prosperity;  he  expelled 
the  Syrian  garrison  from  the  tower  in  Jerusalem,  and 
occupied  Joppa  as  a  seaport.  The  territory  of  the  Jews 
was  greatly  enlarged.  If  Judas  was  the  hero  of  the  Mac- 
cabees, and  Jonathan  was  the  diplomatist,  surely  Simon 
was  the  great  statesman.  I  have  not  space  to  tell  of  all 
his  great  deeds,  but  will  give  from  the  first  book  of 
Maccabees  a  pleasing  bit  of  his  history: 

"Then  did  they  till  their  ground  in  peace,  and  the  earth 
gave  her  increase,  and  the  trees  of  the  field  their  fruit. 
The  ancient  men  sat  all  in  the  streets,  communing  to- 
gether of  good  things,  and  the  young  men  put  on  glorious 
and  warlike  apparel.  He  provided  victuals  for  the  cities, 
and  set  in  them  all  manner  of  munition  so  that  his  hon- 
orable name  was  renowned  unto  the  end  of  the  world. 
He  made  peace  in  the  land,  and  Israel  rejoiced  with  great 


THE  MACCABEES  239 

joy.  For  every  man  sat  under  his  vine  and  fig  tree,  and 
there  was  none  to  fray  them ;  neither  was  there  any  left 
in  the  land  to  fight  against  them ;  yea,  the  kings  them- 
selves were  overthrown  in  those  days.  Moreover,  he 
strengthened  all  his  people  that  were  brought  low.  He 
searched  out  the  law,  and  every  dissenter  of  the  law  and 
wicked  person  he  took  away.  He  beautified  the  sanctuary 
and  all  the  temple,  and  multiplied  its  vessels."  He  is  the 
last  of  the  Maccabean  brothers.  His  brother  John  was 
killed  by  the  Arabians. 

We  now  relate  the  tragic  termination  of  Simon's  life. 
His  son-in-law,  Ptolemy,  was  a  governor  of  Jericho,  and 
this  son-in-law  aspired  to  occupy  the  priesthood  and  the 
generalship  held  by  Simon.  He  invited  Simon  to  visit 
him.  Simon  went  and  took  his  wife,  his  eldest  son, 
Judas,  and  his  youngest  son,  Mattathias,  with  him.  His 
most  illustrious  son,  John  Hyrcanus,  was,  fortunately, 
not  with  him.  Ptolemy  infamously  murdered  Simon  and 
the  two  sons,  and  John  Hyrcanus  came  with  an  army  to 
punish  him.  Ptolemy  led  John's  mother  out  on  the  walls 
and  threatened  to  put  her  to  death  if  John  did  not  retire 
from  his  position.  His  mother  implored  him  to  storm 
the  place  and  not  to  mind  her  being  killed.  But  he  could 
not  stand  to  bring  his  mother  to  death,  and  turned  away. 
Then  Ptolemy  killed  the  mother  anyhow  and  fled  the 
country.  I  am  sorry  that  we  have  no  record  of  his  being 
hanged. 

John  Hyrcanus,  the  son  of  Simon,  is  now  made  the 
high  priest  and  commander-in-chief,  and  under  him  Judea 
wonderfully  enlarged  its  territory.  He  destroyed  the  Sa- 
maritan temple  and  the  city  so  that  one  could  not  tell 
where  the  city  ever  stood.  He  invaded  Edom,  the  home 
of  Esau,  and  annexed  it  to  Jacob.  Little  did  he  think 
that  in  thus  uniting  Esau  with  Jacob  he  was  arranging 


240  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

unwittingly  for  the  placing  of  an  Edomite  on  the  throne 
of  Judea.  Antipas,  an  Edomite,  was  made  local  gover- 
nor of  Edom,  to  be  succeeded  by  his  son  Antipater,  whose 
policy  will  be  considered  in  the  last  chapter  on  this  Inter- 
Biblical  period.  John  was  now  at  the  height  of  his 
power  and  influence,  but  a  quarrel  was  developed  between 
him  and  the  Pharisees. 

I  here  stop  to  make  some  explanation  of  the  three 
Jewish  sects — the  Pharisees,  the  Sadducees,  and  the  Es- 
senes.  The  Pharisees  were  derived  from  the  Scribes. 
The  Scribes  originated  with  Ezra,  and  the  Pharisees 
were  a  development  of  the  Scribes.  They  held  as  bind- 
ing the  written  Bible  and  the  oral  traditions.  These  oral 
traditions,  as  they  claimed,  were  handed  down  from 
Moses,  and  afterwards  were  embodied  in  the  Talmud. 
Now,  there  are  some  good  things  about  them.  They 
believed  in  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  in  the  immor- 
tality of  the  soul,  in  the  existence  of  angels ;  they  kept 
alive  the  hope  of  a  coming  personal  Messiah.  But  they 
became  intense  ritualists  and  formalists. 

Now,  the  Sadducees.  The  word  means  simply  Zadok- 
ites,  that  is,  they  claim  to  be  the  followers  of  the  high 
priest,  Zadok,  away  back  yonder  in  Solomon's  time.  As 
the  Pharisees  were  derived  from  the  Scribes,  the  Sad- 
ducees were  derived  from  the  priests.  The  Sadducees 
rightly  held  to  the  written  Bible  only,  and  rejected  all 
traditions.  But  they  were  sceptics ;  they  did  not  believe 
in  angels,  nor  in  spirits,  nor  in  the  immortality  of  the 
soul,  nor  in  the  resurrection  of  the  body.  In  the  next 
place,  they  were  simply  a  political  party ;  they  believed 
in  religion  as  an  institution,  but  not  as  an  inspiration. 
Like  many  politicians  now  that  think  they  should  hold  on 
to  religion  to  keep  the  people  under  control,  but  do  not 
believe  in  it  for  themselves. 


THE  MACCABEES  241 

The  Essenes  were  neither  a  political  nor  an  ecclesias- 
tical party.  They  were  rather  a  monastic  order.  They 
abjured  marriages ;  they  were  vegetarians ;  they  would 
not  eat  any  meat,  and  would  not  let  a  woman  come  into 
the  settlement  at  all.  They  perpetuated  themselves  by 
adopting  children  and  training  them  to  be  monks.  They 
would  not  go  into  trade  nor  commerce,  and,  like  the 
Quakers,  would  not  take  an  oath.  They  were  the  Phari- 
sees gone  to  seed.  They  prayed,  but,  like  the  ancient 
Persians,  they  prayed  toward  the  sun  and  not  toward 
the  temple. 

I  have  not  the  space  to  relate  in  detail  the  illustrious 
deeds  of  John  Hyrcanus.  He  was  the  last  great  Mac- 
cabee.  The  illustrious  members  of  the  family  were  as 
follows :  Old  Alattathias,  who  led  in  the  rebellion  against 
Antiochus  Epiphanes ;  the  great  Judas,  who  succeeded 
him ;  Jonathan,  who  followed  Judas ;  Simon,  who  fol- 
lowed Jonathan ;  and  John  Hyrcanus,  the  son  of  Simon, 
who  followed  his  father.  John  Hyrcanus  died  about 
B.  c.  105.  His  sons  were  the  first  who  crowned  them- 
selves as  kings.  There  were  none  of  them  equal  to  or 
worthy  of  the  five  great  Maccabees  whose  names  have 
been  given  above.  While  the  sons  of  John  were  ruling, 
Rome  comes  upon  the  scene  and  history  rapidly  develops 
until  the  coming  of  our  Lord. 

QUESTIONS 

1.  What  the  name  and  extent  of  the  period  discussed  in  this 
chapter  ? 

2.  At  what  point  did  the  last  chapter  close? 

3.  Describe  the  occasion  of  the  battle  at  Beth-Zecharias. 

4.  Tell  of  the  death  of  Eleazar,  the  brother  of  Judas. 

5-  What  prompted  Lysias  to  advise  Antiochus  to  make  peace 
with  Judas,  and  what  the  result  of  the  peace? 

6.  From  this  time  on,  what  the  nature  of  the  war  between 
the  Maccabees  and  Syria? 


242         THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

7.  Tell  how  Demetrius  I  became  king  at  Antioch. 

8.  Whom  did  he  appoint  to  be  high  priest,  and  why  did  the 
Pharisees  accept  him? 

9.  What  outrage   was   committed   by   this   high   priest   which 
caused  Judas  to  drive  him  out  of  Jerusalem? 

ID.     What  the  occasion  of  another  invasion  of  Judea  by  the 
Syrians?    Describe  the  battle  of  Capharsalama. 

11.  What  two  noted  embassies  were  sent  out  by  Judas? 

12.  Give  the  treaty  between  the  Romans  and  the  Maccabees. 

13.  Give  the  transcript  of  the  letter  from  the  Lacedaemonians? 

14.  Describe  the  battle  of  Eleasa  and  the  death  of  Judas. 

15.  Who  succeeded  Judas  as  high  priest  and  commander-in- 
chief  ? 

16.  Give  the  history  of  the  temple  in  Egypt  at  Leontopolis. 

17.  What  new  claimant  for  the  throne  at  Antioch? 

18.  Describe   the  third  marriage   between  the    Ptolemies   and 
the  Seleucids,  and  the  ultimate  result. 

19.  Tell  of  the  tragic  death  of  Jonathan,  and  who  succeeded 
him. 

20.  What  the  fate  of  John,  the  brother  of  Simon? 

21.  What   the   relative   excellencies   of    Judas,  Jonathan,   and 
Simon? 

22.  Give  the  quotation  from  I  Maccabees  showing  a  pleasant 
part  of  the  history  of  Simon. 

23.  Give  an  account  of  the  tragic  death  of  Simon. 

24.  What  the  great  achievement   of  John  Hyrcanus,   son  of 
Simon? 

25.  Give  some  account  of  the  three  Jewish  sects — the  Pharisees, 
Sadducees,  and  Essenes. 

26.  About  what  time  did  John  Hyrcanus  die? 

27.  Which  one  of  his  sons  first  became  king  of  the  Jews? 

28.  What  may  we  say  of  the  Asmonasan  kings  in  comparison 
with  the  five  preceding  Maccabees? 


XX 

THE  JEWS  UNDER  THE  ROMANS  AND  HEROD 

(b.  c.  65  To  THE  Birth  of  Christ) 

I  COMMENCE  this  chapter  with  these  opening  re- 
marks : 
First,  I  have  not  been  able,  in  the  space  allowed,  to 
even  name  all  of  the  Jewish  books  of  the  period,  nor 
to  distinguish  sufficiently  between  them.  The  classifica- 
tions of  that  literature  are :  The  Wisdom  literature,  such 
as  "Wisdom"  and  "Ecclesiasticus ;"  the  Romance  litera- 
ture, such  as  "Tobit"  and  "Judith ;"  and  the  Apocalyptic 
literature,  such  as  "Baruch"  and  "Enoch" — though  it  is 
doubtful  if  any  part  of  Enoch  was  written  before  Christ; 
and  the  spurious  prophetic  literature,  such  as  the  Sibylline 
books  and  the  imitation  Psalter  literature ;  the  philosophic 
literature  of  the  Alexandrian  Jews ;  and  the  historical 
literature,  such  as  I  and  H  Maccabees ;  and  the  forged 
epistolary  literature,  such  as  the  letter  of  Jeremiah ;  and 
the  literature  of  forged  prayers,  such  as"  those  attributed 
to  Manasseh  and  Azarias. 

Second,  There  has  not  been  space  enough  to  examine 
critically  the  discrepancies  between  Jewish  historians  on 
the  one  hand  and  the  Greek  and  Roman  historians  on  the 
other  hand. 

Third,  There  has  been  such  condensation  of  names  and 
dates  and  little  chance  to  differentiate  enough  to  make 
living  pictures  before  the  mind. 

243 


244  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

It  will,  therefore,  be  understood  that  these  seven  chap- 
ters do  not  constitute  a  full  discussion  on  the  Inter-Bib- 
lical period,  but  are  intended  merely  as  a  guide  to  a  more 
extended  study  of  this  period. 

I  will  now  give  a  very  brief  summary  of  the  preced- 
ing six  chapters: 

1.  The  names,  "Jew"  and  "Judaism,"  came  into  promi- 
nence with  Ezra,  the  scribe,  called  the  Second  Moses. 

2.  With  him  also  rose  the  order  of  the  Scribes,  who 
were  the  copyists,  multipliers,  and  expounders  of  the 
sacred  scriptures,  and  the  synagogues  as  places  of  wor- 
ship and  biblical  instruction,  and  the  council  of  the  elders, 
which  later  became  the  Sanhedrin. 

3.  With  him  also  came  the  revival  of  the  law,  the 
sanctity  of  the  Sabbath,  the  sanctity  of  the  marriage  re- 
lation, the  permanent  renunciation  of  idolatry  by  the 
Jews,  and  ever  increasing  hopes  of  immortality  and  of 
the  coming  of  the  Messiah. 

4.  The  Judea  of  the  restoration,  after  the  Babylonian 
exile,  was  a  small  territory  around  Jerusalem,  not  as  big 
as  some  of  the  counties  of  Texas,  to  be  vastly  enlarged 
under  the  Maccabees. 

5.  Following  the  refusal  to  recognize  the  Samaritans 
as  Jews,  and  the  strict  construction  of  the  marriage  law, 
arose  the  Samaritan  temple  on  Mt.  Gerizim,  which  stood 
until  destroyed  by  John  Hyrcanus. 

6.  Judea  was  subject  to  Persia  until  annexed  by  Alex- 
ander the  Great,  b.  c.  332. 

7.  After  his  death  it  was  subject  to  Egypt,  from  b.  c. 
323  to  198. 

8.  The  greatest  events  under  the  Ptolemies  were  the 
translation  of  the  Hebrew  scriptures  into  Greek  and  the 
rise  of  Hellenism,  distinguishing  the  Hebrews  from  the 
Hellenists. 


THE  ROMANS  AND  HEROD  245 

9.  From  B.  c.  198  to  128  Judah  was  subject  to  the 
Seleucids  of  Antioch. 

10.  The  events  of  this  subjection  were:  First,  the  at- 
tempt of  Antiochus  IV,  surnamed  Epiphanes,  to  utterly 
destroy  the  Jews'  reHgion,  bringing  the  kingdom  of  God 
into  greater  peril  than  ever  in  human  history  except  in 
the  days  of  Noah  and  in  the  days  of  Elijah  when  he  stood 
alone  against  the  world.  Second,  the  heroic  resistance 
of  Mattathias  and  his  five  sons,  John,  Simon,  Judas,  Elea- 
zar,  and  Jonathan,  all  of  them  dying  violent  deaths  in  the 
violent  struggle,  continued  by  John  Hyrcanus,  son  of 
Simon. 

11.  In  these  Maccabean  wars  the  following  great  re- 
sults were  obtained:  'First,  religious  liberty  by  Judas 
Maccabeus  ;  second,  political  independence  by  his  brothers 
Jonathan  and  Simon  and  by  John  Hyrcanus,  son  of 
Simon ;  third,  great  expansion  of  the  Jewish  territory 
until  it  almost  reached  the  old  boundaries  of  David's 
kingdom — this  expansion  included  Samaria,  Perea,  Gal- 
ilee, Gilead,  Iturea,  Idumea,  and  Philistia;  fourth,  that 
Aristobulus,  son  of  John  Hyrcanus,  was  the  first  to  put 
on  the  royal  diadem ;  fifth,  in  this  period  came  to  the 
front  the  three  noted  Jewish  sects — the  Pharisees,  the 
Sadducees,  and  the  Essenes ;  sixth,  that  a  Jewish  temple 
was  established  in  Egypt,  which  lasted  until  A.  D.  70, 
when  the  Jerusalem  temple  was  also  destroyed. 

12.  The  kings  of  the  Asmonsean  Dynasty  were  un- 
worthy of  their  illustrious  Maccabean  ancestry. 

The  foregoing  remarks  refer  to  the  preceding  chap- 
ters on  the  Inter-Biblical  period,  and  we  are  now  to  con- 
sider the  last  section  of  the  period,  from  b.  c.  65  to  the 
birth  of  Christ,  in  which  Judea  is  subject  to  the  Romans, 
and  the  Asmonaean  Dynasty  is  succeeded  by  Herod,  some- 
times called  the  Great,  an  Idumaean,  whose  mother  was 


246  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

an  Arabian.  The  countries  now  to  the  front  are  Rome, 
Pontus  under  Mithridates,  Parthia,  which  Rome  never 
conquered,  and  the  dying  kingdoms  of  the  Ptolemies  and 
the  Seleucids.    Let  us  glance  now  for  a  moment  at 

Rome 

At  this  time  Rome,  as  a  republic,  had  become  utterly 
corrupt.  Indeed,  it  was  no  longer  a  republic  in  any 
true  sense.  There  is  the  distinction  between  a  democ- 
racy and  a  republic.  In  a  pure  democracy  the  people  rule 
directly;  in  a  republic  they  rule  representatively.  The 
United  States  is  a  republic,  ever  approaching  a  democ- 
racy. The  Baptist  churches  are  the  only  pure  democra- 
racies  in  the  world.  The  Presbyterians  have  a  republican 
form  of  government ;  they  govern  by  representatives.  The 
senate  of  Rome  constituted  its  republican  feature,  and  had 
become  the  most  corrupt  oligarchy  in  history.  They  ap- 
pointed the  proconsuls  who  governed  all  the  provinces, 
except  those  ruled  by  military  appointees  of  Caesar.  The 
tribunes,  elected  by  the  citizens,  constituted  the  only  dem- 
ocratic element — but  the  elections  became  a  mere  farce. 
The  lands  of  Italy  were  now  owned  by  a  few  corrupt 
landlords  who  used  up  the  resources  of  the  farms  to 
support  a  vicious  city  life.  The  overwhelming  majority 
of  the  inhabitants  of  Italy  were  slaves,  captives  of  for- 
eign wars,  who  tilled  all  the  farms,  built  all  the  imposing 
edifices,  constituted  the  entire  class  of  mechanics,  arti- 
sans, scribes  and  domestics.  These  slaves  were  not  of  an 
inferior  race,  but  were  the  nobles,  patriots,  the  picked 
men  and  women  of  the  conquered  nations  from  all  over 
the  world,  and  in  thousands  of  instances  far  superior  to 
their  masters  in  education  and  nobility.  They  had  no 
legal  rights.    Their  labor,  their  persons,  their  honor,  their 


THE  ROMANS  AND  HEROD  247 

lives,  were  absolutely  at  the  disposal  of  their  luxurious, 
and  oftentimes  vicious  masters.  The  sturdy  yeomanry 
had  passed  away.  Those  who  were  counted  citizens,  and 
could  vote  for  the  tribune,  did  not  work,  and  lived  on 
gratuitous  distribution  of  rations  and  free  shows.  Who- 
ever could  most  liberally  supply  them  with  "bread  and 
circuses"  could  command  their  votes.  Only  by  the  spoils 
of  conquered  nations,  or  by  the  spoils  of  robbery  of  sub- 
ject provinces  could  one  have  means  enough  to  thus  feed 
and  amuse  the  pampered  and  fickle  body  of  so-called 
Roman  citizens.  Goldsmith,  in  "The  Deserted  Village," 
well  says, 

111  fares  the  land  to  hastening  ills  a  prey, 
Where  wealth  accumulates  and  men  decay. 

About  the  beginning  of  our  period,  Cicero,  the  great 
orator,  was  consul  exposing  the  Cataline  conspiracy,  in 
those  famous  orations  which  are  studied  as  a  preparation 
for  college.  Three  men,  by  combination,  controlled  the 
world.  This  was  the  first  Roman  Triumvirate,  that  is, 
three-man  power,  or  three-man  government — Julius 
Caesar,  Gnseus  Pompey,  and  Publius  Crassus.  There  were 
two  formidable  enemies  of  Rome  at  this  time — Mithri- 
dates,  king  of  Pontus,  and  the  Parthians  from  the  shores 
of  the  Caspian  Sea.  Pompey  conquered  Mithradates,  and 
also  overthrew  the  last  of  the  Seleucids  at  Antioch,  wind- 
ing up  this  division  of  the  Greek  empire,  and  this  brought 
him  in  touch  with  Judea.  Pompey  besieged  and  captured 
Jerusalem  and  pushed  his  way  into  the  Holy  of  Holies, 
and  was  astounded  at  what  he  found.  Tacitus  tells  what 
he  found:  "He  found  within  no  images  of  the  gods,  a 
vacant  mercy  seat,  and  an  empty  ark." 

Thus  passed  away  the  Asmonzean  kingdom.  The  Jews 
never  forgave  this  impiety  of  Pompey.     While  the  As- 


248         THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

monaean  kingdom  passed  awa}',  members  of  the  family 
yet  remained  for  some  years,  with  a  kind  of  princely  dig- 
nity. The  Jews  were  more  tolerant  to  Pompey's  fellow 
triumvir,  Crassus,  who  nine  years  later  (b.  c.  54),  when 
governor  of  Syria,  robbed  the  temple  of  all  its  treasures, 
amounting  in  cash  value  to  about  $10,000,000.  A  year 
later,  b.  c,  53,  Crassus  was  defeated  by  the  Parthians, 
his  army  annihilated,  and  himself  slain  at  the  battle  of 
Carrhge.  This  downfall  of  Crassus  the  Jews  interpreted 
as  the  vengeance  of  the  Almighty  for  his  robbery  of  the 
temple.  At  any  rate,  this  victory  of  the  Parthians,  b.  c. 
53,  brought  about  two  results: 

1.  It  opened  the  way  for  them  to  come  in  touch  with 
Judea,  which  I  will  tell  about  later. 

2.  It  opened  a  way  for  the  rupture  between  Caesar  and 
Pompey  (b.  c.  49),  the  other  Triumvirs,  and  which  led 
to  the  famous  civil  war  which  was  settled  at  the  battle 
of  Pharsalia,  in  which  Caesar  with  22,000  of  his  veterans 
defeated  and  captured  Pompey's  army  of  50,000  men. 
Caesar's  grim  old  veterans  were  told  that  Pompey's 
legions  were  "city  dandies,"  and  hence  were  instructed 
to  strike  at  their  faces,  since  they  prided  themselves  so 
much  on  their  good  looks  that  to  hit  at  their  prettiness 
scared  them  worse  than  to  hit  at  their  hearts.  Pompey 
fled  to  Egypt,  and  was  assasinated  as  soon  as  he  stepped 
ashore.  Caesar  followed  him,  and  was  temporarily  snared 
by  the  witchery  of  the  famous  Cleopatra.  Caesar  is  now 
the  ruler  of  the  world.  The  next  part  of  my  subject  is 
thus  headed : 

Esau  and  Ishmael  on  the  Throne  of  Jacob 

in  the  person  of  Herod,  the  Idumaean,  whose  mother 
was  an  Arabian.  In  a  former  chapter  was  recounted 
the  final  conquest  of  Idumaea,  or  Edom,  by  John  Hyr- 


THE  ROMANS  AND  HEROD  24,9 

canus,  and  its  incorporation  into  Judea,  thus  forcibly- 
uniting  Jacob  and  Esau.  Antipas,  a  shrewd  and  powerful 
Idumaeari,  was  left  as  local  governor  of  the  conquered 
Edom.  He  left  as  his  successor  a  greater  and  more  un- 
scrupulous son,  Antipater.  This  Antipater  had  sided 
with  Pompey  against  Caesar,  but  when  he  learned  the  re- 
sult of  the  battle  of  Pharsalia,  he  flopped  over  to  Caesar 
in  the  snap  of  the  fingers.  He  hurriedly  gathered  an 
army  and  rushed  to  Caesar's  help  at  Alexandria,  where 
Caesar  was  having  a  time  of  it,  trying  to  conquer  that 
great  city,  and  so  says  Milne-Rea :  "The  Idumaean  mouse 
helped  the  Roman  lion,  and  the  lion  was  grateful."  On 
the  rupture  with  Pompey,  Caesar  had  released  Aristobu- 
lus,  one  of  the  contesting  Maccabees,  and  loaned  him  two 
legions  to  create  a  diversion  in  Judea  against  Pompey. 
Pompey's  friends  poisoned  Aristobulus  and  executed  his 
brother  Alexander.  Now,  for  the  help  rendered  him  at 
Alexandria,  Caesar  made  Antipater  a  Roman  citizen  and 
procurator  of  Judea,  Samaria,  and  Galilee.  Hyrcanus  H 
was  made  high  priest  and  a  Roman  senator,  and  also  was 
made  hereditary  ethnarch,  that  is,  subordinate  governor. 
Antipater  at  once  began  to  advance  his  family,  as  fathers 
are  wont  to  do.  His  son,  Phasael,  was  made  governor  of 
Jerusalem,  and  his  greater  son,  known  later  as  Herod 
the  Great,  then  just  twenty-five  years  old,  was  sent  into 
Galilee  to  put  down  bands  of  desperadoes,  robbers,  and 
religious  zealots,  who  as  patriots,  sheltered  themselves  in 
caves  and  warred  against  Rome. 

Many  years  ago  "Harper's  Magazine"  gave  a  richly 
illustrated  account  of  Herod's  successful  war  against 
these  devoted  Jews,  who  so  desperately  resisted  the 
Roman  supremacy.  From  the  mountain  tops  Herod  let 
down  huge  boxes,  as  big  as  a  flat  car,  by  chains,  filled 
with  Roman  soldiers,  until  they  were  just  level  with  the 


250  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

mouth  of  the  caves,  and  there,  swung  in  the  air,  these 
grim  Roman  soldiers  gained  an  entrance  by  desperate 
fighting,  killing  and  capturing  these  so-called  robbers. 
If  they  had  succeeded  they  would  have  passed  into  his- 
tory with  the  fame  of  William  Tell,  Sir  William  Wallace, 
or  Francis  Marion,  and  we  must  not  think  of  these  men 
as  ordinary  robbers.  Barabbas,  who  was  preferred  to 
Christ,  was  this  kind  of  a  robber — not  an  ordinary  high- 
wayman— and  one  of  the  apostles  was  Simon  the  Zealot. 
We  may,  therefore,  understand  why  the  Sanhedrin  sum- 
moned Herod,  in  this  case,  to  answer  at  its  bar  for  mur- 
dering "free  Jews,"  who  counted  themselves  patriots, 
and  why  they  later  preferred  Barabbas  to  Christ.  The 
two  so-called  thieves  crucified  with  Christ  were  also  of 
this  kind.  When  summoned  to  appear  before  the  Sanhe- 
drin, Herod  came  with  an  armed  band  and  overawed  the 
court.  Only  one  member,  Shammai,  dared  to  move  his 
condemnation,  and  before  the  motion  could  be  put  the 
weak  old  Hyrcanus,  the  high  priest,  the  mere  tool  of 
Herod's  father,  adjourned  the  court.  Soon  after  this 
Rome  was  turned  into  a  bedlam  by 

The  Assassination  of  C^sar  in  the  Roman  Senate 
(March  15th,  b.  c.  44) 

Bedlam  is  the  name  for  a  madhouse.  There  was  an  old 
English  madhouse  called  Bedlam,  and  ever  since  a  mad- 
house has  been  called  a  bedlam.  Sixty  senators,  led  by 
Brutus  and  Cassius,  participated  in  the  murder  of  Caesar. 
Read  Shakespeare's  "Julius  Csesar,"  Froude's  "Sketch  of 
Caesar,"  and  Mommsen's  "History  of  Rome"  at  this 
period.  The  senate  was  far  more  corrupt  than  Cassar. 
It  was  impossible,  out  of  such  material,  to  reconstruct  a 
republic,  and  this  led  to  the  second  Roman  Triumvirate, 


THE  ROINIANS  AND  HEROD  251 

to  wit:  Octavius  Csesar,  a  nephew  of  Julius,  and  his 
adopted  son,  Mark  Antony,  and  Lepidus.  Antipater  was 
raising  an  army  to  help  Brutus  and  Cassius  when,  b.  c.  43, 
the  Jews  poisoned  him.  Herod,  his  son,  would  have  fol- 
lowed his  father's  course,  but  at  the  famous  battle  of 
Philippi  the  incipient  republic  perished,  where  Octavius 
and  Antony  defeated  Brutus  and  Cassius,  who  both  com- 
mitted suicide,  as  did  the  great  Cato  somewhat  later,  in 
Africa.  Mark  Antony  also  captured  and  slew  Cicero, 
who  also  favored  the  republic,  just  as  he  was  about  to 
get  into  a  boat  to  escape.  There  is  a  great  painting  of 
Cicero  stepping  out  of  his  litter  to  meet  his  murderer. 

Herod  now  cajoled  Mark  Antony,  who  commanded  in 
the  East,  and  who  against  all  Jewish  accusations  made 
both  Herod  and  Phasael  tetrarchs  under  the  nominal 
sovereignty  of  the  Maccabee,  Hyrcanus  H.  This  was 
B.  c.  41.  Antigonus,  the  younger  son  of  Aristobulos  and 
brother  of  Hyrcanus,  claimed  the  throne,  and  was  sup- 
ported by  the  Parthians.  They  made  him  king,  and 
upheld  him  in  power  for  three  years,  b.  c.  40  to  37,  and 
for  this  time  Judea  was  under  control  of  the  Parthians. 
With  their  help  Antigonus,  the  last  of  the  Asmonzean 
kings,  captured  Jerusalem  and  with  it  Phasael  and  Hyr- 
canus. He  cut  off  the  ears  of  Hyrcanus,  the  mutilation 
barring  him  from  the  priesthood,  and  sent  him  to  Baby- 
lon. Phasael  committed  suicide,  and  Herod  fled  to 
Masada  at  the  southern  end  of  the  Dead  Sea,  and  left 
his  women  folk  there  with  his  brother  Joseph,  and  he 
himself  went  first  to  Egypt,  and  then  to  Rome,  telling 
how  Antigonus  welcomed  the  Parthians,  the  enemies  of 
Rome,  and  so  cajoling  both  Octavius  and  Antony,  and  by 
a  decree  of  the  senate  was  made  king  of  Judea.  Thus 
passed  away  the  Asmonzean  line — or  Maccabee  line — and 
thus  Herod,  the  descendant  of  Esau,  whose  mother  was 


g52         THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

a  descendant  of  Ishmael,  takes  his  seat  on  the  throne  of 
Jacob.  Herod  returned  with  two  Roman  legions,  and 
swelled  the  number  to  about  100,000  by  enlisting  rene- 
gade Jews,  and  besieged  and  captured  Jerusalem  on  the 
twenty-sixth  anniversary  of  its  capture  by  Pompey.  He 
also  captured  Antigonus,  whom  the  Parthians  had  put  in 
power,  and  sent  him  to  Antony  at  Antioch,  who  executed 
him.  Antony  called  him  "Antigona,"  which  is  the  female 
name  for  Antigonus.  He  thus  changed  his  name  to  a 
woman's  name  because  he  cried  and  whined,  but  I  have 
known  some  women  who  would  neither  whine  nor  cry. 
Antony  executed  him,  and  that  was  the  first  time  in 
history  that  a  sovereign  of  a  nation  suffered  death  under 
the  axe  of  the  Roman  lictor. 

The  Reign  of  Herod,  b.  c.  37-4 

We  now  take  up  the  reign  of  Herod  from  b.  c.  37  to 
the  birth  of  Christ.  Before  he  captured  Jerusalem  he 
had  married  the  beautiful  Asmonaean  princess,  Mariamne, 
hoping  to  secure  thereby  the  support  of  the  favorers  of 
the  Maccabean  line.  The  marriage  was  unfortunate  for 
this  beautiful  woman,  for  she  was  persecuted  by  Herod's 
sister,  Salome,  and  by  Cypres,  his  Arabian  mother.  In 
the  end — for  these  two  women  never  stopped — Herod 
was  induced  to  murder  his  beautiful  wife,  the  only 
woman  he  ever  loved — and  he  married  a  great  many 
women — and  later  to  murder  his  two  sons  by  this  wife. 
Remorse  for  murdering  the  woman  that  he  loved  kept 
biting  him  like  an  undying  worm,  and  kept  stinging  him 
like  a  scorpion  as  long  as  he  lived. 

Here  we  can  do  no  more  than  summarize  his  reign. 
First,  when  he  captured  Jerusalem  he  put  to  death  forty- 
three  members  of  the  Sanhedrin,  which  had  once  sum- 


THE  ROMANS  AND  HEROD  253 

moned  him  to  trial.  Second,  he  made  Ananel,  an  obscure 
Jew  of  Babylon,  high  priest,  and  when  this  raised  a 
clamor  he  yielded  and  appointed  the  brother  of  his  wife, 
Mariamne,  a  boy  seventeen  years  of  age,  very  popular 
and  very  much  beloved  of  the  people.  Third,  there  was 
an  appeal  by  the  people,  by  the  Maccabean  women,  to 
Cleopatra,  who  had  completely  ensnared  Antony.  Influ- 
enced by  Cleopatra,  Antony  summoned  Herod  to  appear 
before  him  at  Alexandria,  but  having  heard  him,  notwith- 
standing that  Cleopatra  was  against  him,  he  dismissed 
the  charges  against  him,  and  added  Coele-Syria  to  his 
kingdom.  Nearly  everybody  would  be  willing  to  be  put 
on  trial  if  followed  by  such  a  verdict  as  that. 

Fourth  event,  when  on  the  death  of  Lepidus  civil  war 
was  waged  between  the  two  remaining  Triumvirs,  Herod 
sided  with  Antony,  but  the  great  sea  battle  at  Actium 
decided  the  war  in  favor  of  Octavius,  b.  c.  31. 

Fifth,  Herod  instantly  flopped  over  to  the  other  side, 
sought  Octavius  in  the  Island  of  Rhodes,  cajoled  him, 
was  confirmed  in  his  kingdom,  and  in  the  next  year 
Octavius  enlarged  his  territory  by  adding  Gadara, 
Hyppo,  Samaria,  and  the  seaports  of  Joppa,  Anthedon, 
Gaza,  and  a  place  called  Straton's  Tower,  which  after- 
ward became  the  Csesarea  of  the  New  Testament. 

Sixth,  soon  after  this,  Herod,  as  I  have  said,  put  to 
death  his  wife,  the  beautiful  Maccabean  princess,  and 
mother  of  two  sons,  b.  c.  28,  and  one  year  later  he 
executed  her  mother,  Alexandria. 

Seventh,  he  began  to  Hellenize  the  country  by  erect- 
ing in  Jerusalem  a  Grecian  theatre,  and  an  enormous 
amphitheatre,  and  instituted  Grecian  games  and  gladia- 
torial combats.  He  erected  heathen  temples  in  all  the 
new  cities  that  he  built,  particularly  Caesarea  and  old 
Samaria.     Herod  rebuilt  that  and  called  it  Sebaste,  in 


254  THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

honor  of  Augustus.  He  erected  a  splendid  palace  in 
Jerusalem,  which  we  read  about  in  the  New  Testament, 
and  he  also  erected  that  famous  tower  of  Antonia,  which 
we  also  read  about  in  the  New  Testament,  and  which 
commanded  the  approach  of  the  temple. 

Eighth,  feeling  that  he  was  hated  of  all  men,  he 
sought  to  regain  popularity  by  the  Roman  method  of 
free  distribution  of  bread,  and  as  this  was  in  the  time 
of  both  famine  and  pestilence,  he  did  thereby  regain 
much  popular  favor. 

Ninth,  but  his  greatest  exploit  in  this  direction  was 
the  restoration  and  enlargement  of  the  temple  built  five 
centuries  before  by  Zerubbabel.  This  mighty  enterprise, 
far  superior  to  either  Solomon's  temple  or  the  one  by 
Zerubbabel,  was  commenced  b.  c.  20,  and  was  not  finally 
completed  until  a.  d.  65,  which  was  just  five  years 
before  Titus  destroyed  it.  This  is  the  famous  temple 
whose  huge  stones  excited  the  wonder  of  the  apostles, 
and  called  forth  our  Lord's  great  prophecy  in  Matthew 
24-25,  and  which  Christ  twice  purified,  once  at  the 
beginning  and  once  at  the  end  of  His  ministry. 

Tenth,  Herod  murdered  his  two  sons  by  Mariamne, 
where  their  mother  before  them  had  been  murdered. 

Eleventh,  he  was  now  the  subject  of  a  loathsome  dis- 
ease, somewhat  like  what  we  now  call  the  bubonic 
plague.    His  Hfe  was  miserable. 

Twelfth,  he  put  to  death  his  son,  Antipater,  by  his 
first  wife  Doris,  which  caused  Octavius  (now  Augustus 
Caesar)  to  say,  "It  is  safer  to  be  Herod's  swine  than  his 
son,"  for  a  superstition  kept  him  from  killing  a  hog. 

Thirteenth,  in  b.  c.  4  he  slaughtered  the  infants  at 
Bethlehem,  so  graphically  told  at  Math.  2:16-18,  in  an 
effort  to  destroy  Him  who  was  "born  King  of  the  Jews," 
and   for  whom  the  angels  sang  their  great   Christmas 


THE  ROMANS  AND  HEROD  255 

hymn.  His  own  death  was  as  horrible  as  that  of 
Antiochus  Epiphanes,  or  that  of  his  grandson,  Herod, 
told  about  in  Acts  12,  who  died  eaten  up  by  worms, 
while  the  word  of  God  lived  and  prospered. 

Herod's  Character 

Just  a  glance  at  his  character.  He  is  not  entitled  to 
be  called  "the  Great."  He  was  a  shrewd  politician, 
easily  cajoling  greater  men  than  himself,  as  he  did  Julius 
Csesar  and  Antony,  and  Augustus  Caesar,  and  was  never 
himself  cajoled  by  Cleopatra,  though  she  tried  her  best 
on  him,  and  she  did  captivate  Julius  Caesar  and  Antony, 
though  she  failed  when  she  tried  her  charms  on  Augustus 
Caesar.  Herod  wanted  to  kill  her  in  the  interest  of 
Antony  when  she  visited  him  some  time  before  this  near 
Jerusalem.  And  he  doubtless  regretted  that  he  allowed 
his  friends  to  overpersuade  him  not  to  kill  her.  He  was 
a  fearless  man,  and  a  really  great  soldier. 

He  was  a  great  builder.  Look  at  the  great  city  he 
built  up  at  the  source  of  the  Jordan.  Look  at  the  city 
of  Samaria.  Look  at  the  city  of  Caesarea.  Look  at  that 
great  temple  and  the  tower  of  Antonia.  He  was  an 
unscrupulous  murderer.  He  was  not  a  persecutor  of 
the  Jews'  religion,  like  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  though 
he  had  no  religion  himself,  and  had  no  respect  for  any 
religion. 

My  last  remark  is  concerning  his  descendants  men- 
tioned in  the  New  Testament.  The  tetrarch,  Philip  of 
Luke  3:1,  the  Archelaus  of  Math.  2:22,  the  Herod 
Antipas  who  murdered  John  the  Baptist  (Mark  6:14) 
and  who  mocked  Christ  when  sent  to  him  by  Pilate — 
these  were  all  his  sons.  The  Herod  who  murdered 
James  (Acts  12)  was  his  grandson.    The  Drusilla  who 


256         THE  INTER-BIBLICAL  PERIOD 

sat  with  Felix  when  Paul  was  tried  (Acts  24),  and  the 
Agrippa  and  Bernice,  before  whom  Paul  appeared,  were 
his  great-grandchildren. 

QUESTIONS 

1.  Give  the  title  and  extent  of  the  last  section  of  the  Inter- 
Biblical  period. 

2.  Why  may  not  these  seven  chapters  constitute  a  full  course 
on  the  Inter-Biblical  period? 

3.  Classify  the  Jewish  literature  of  the  period. 

4.  Give  a  summary  of  the  six  preceding  chapters. 

5.  What  nations  to  the  front  in  this  last  section  of  the  period? 

6.  State  the  conditions  at  Rome  at  the  beginning  of  this  sec- 
tion. 

7.  Who  constituted  the  first  great  Triumvirate  at  Rome? 

8.  What  the  results  of  the  war  with  Mithridates? 

9.  Describe  the  end  of  the  Seleucids'  empire  at  Antioch  and 
its  effect  on  Judea. 

ID.     When  did  Pompey  capture  Jerusalem? 

11.  Of  what  sacrilege  was  he  guilty,  and  how  does  Tacitus 
describe  what  he   found? 

12.  How  many  Jews  did  Pompey  deport  as  slaves  to  Rome, 
and  how  did  this  possibly  affect  the  citizenship? 

13.  Who  nine  years  later  robbed  the  temple  of  all  its  treasures? 

14.  What  the  fate  of  the  Triumvir,  Crassus,  and  what  the 
two  great  results? 

15.  When  and  where  was  the  issue  between  Caesar  and  Pom- 
pey decided,  and  what  the  fate  of  Pompey? 

16.  What  the  last  division  of  this  section  of  the  Inter-Biblical 
period? 

17.  When  Edom  was  incorporated  into  Judea,  what  Idumaean 
was  made  local  governor? 

18.  Who  his  greater  and  more  unscrupulous  successor? 

19.  What  the  part  played  by  Antipater  in  the  war  between 
Csesar  and  Pompey,  and  by  what  rapid  change  and  help  extended 
did  he  secure  the  friendship  of  Caesar? 

20.  State  the  honors  conferred  upon  Antipater  by  Caesar. 

21.  State  how  Antipater  advanced  his  family. 

22.  What  magazine  a  few  years  ago  gave  a  richly  illustrated 
account  of  Herod's  war  against  the  Galilean  Jews,  and  how  was 
the  war  conducted  to  a  successful  issue? 

23.  If  these  zealots  and  so-called  robbers  had  been  successful, 
with  what  illustrious  names  would  they  have  been  classified? 

24.  What  the  result  of  the  Sanhedrin's  summoning  Herod  to 
answer  for  destroying  these  Galileans? 

25.  What  great  event  March  15th,  B.  C.  44,  converted  Rome 
into  a  bedlam? 


THE  ROMANS  AND  HEROD  S57 

26.  Give  the  names  of  the  second  Roman  Triumvirate? 

27.  What  four  illustrious  Romans  opposed  the  Triumvirate? 

28.  When  and  where  was  decided  the  great  issue  between  the 
Republicans  and  the  Triumvirate? 

29.  What  the  fate  of  Brutus,  Cassius,  Cato  and  Cicero  re- 
spectively ? 

30.  With  what  party  did  Antipater  sympathize? 

31.  After  the  assassination  of  Antipater,  how  did  Herod,  who 
succeeded  his  father,  cajole  Mark  Antony,  and  what  honors  were 
received? 

2,2.  Show  how  the  Parthians  came  in  touch  with  Judea,  and 
whom  they  placed  on  the  throne  at  Jerusalem  ? 

Z7>-  When  Antigonus  became  the  governor  of  Jerusalem,  what 
the  result  to  the  Herodian  family? 

34.  By  what  experiment  did  Herod  turn  the  scales?  How  did 
he  conquer  Jerusalem,  and  what  the  fate  of  Antigonus? 

35.  What  the  period  of  the  reign  of  Herod? 

36.  Tell  the  story  of  Mariamne,  his  Maccabean  wife,  and  of 
her  two  sons  by  Herod. 

2,-7.  When  Herod  captured  Jerusalem,  how  did  he  avenge  on 
the  Sanhedrin  their  once  summoning  him  to  trial? 

38.  Give  the  relations  between  Herod  and  Cleopatra,  queen  of 
Egypt. 

39.  When  on  the  death  of  Lepidus  civil  war  was  waged 
between  Octavius  Caesar  and  Antony,  with  which  side  did  Herod 
align  himself? 

40.  What  great  sea-battle  decided  the  war  in  favor  of  Octavius, 
and  what  its  date? 

41.  After  this  battle,  how  did  Herod  cajole  Octavius  and  what 
new  honors  were  conferred  upon  him? 

42.  Hov/  did  Herod  attempt  to  Hellenize  the  country? 

43.  By  what  two  great  expedients  did  Herod  seek  to  placate 
the  hatred  of  the  people? 

44.  What  loathsome  disease  now  came  upon  him? 

45.  What  remark  was  made  by  Augustus  Caesar  when  Herod 
put  to  death  his  son  Antipater,  by  his  first  wife  Doris? 

46.  What  his  last  murderous  exploit,  and  where  in  the  New 
Testament  do  we  find  an  account  of  it? 

47.  Give  a  summary  of  Herod's  character. 

48.  Give  the  proofs  that  he  was  a  great  builder. 

49.  Name  his  descendants  and  their  part  in  New  Testament 
history. 


Date  Due 

■^t^imi^ 

f 

(  AyfaAaiWpi^ 

^mmtm^^ 

\  y  [i^,i1iiayJi^ 

yt^^^^n^f'^" 

m 

PRINTED 

IN  U.  S.  A. 

BS1555.C319 

Daniel  and  the  inter-Biblical  period, 


Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Librar> 


1    1012  00012  5312 


